Could he have actually conquered the whole world if his soldiers

>>1797911
>Could he have actually conquered the whole world if his soldiers didn't mutiny?

I believe that yes.

>Is there any value in conquering the world beyond saying "I was the guy who did it"?

Yes.Picture yourself saying to yours grandsons:¨I conquer the world¨

>>1797911

>Could he have actually conquered the whole world

Absolutely not.

Would there have been any value in it? Impossible to say.

Alexander was pretty good at adapting to and embracing other other cultures (specifically the Persian culture). He would probably have been able to expand his empire and keep it stable. But the whole world? No way. And it would have disintegrated the moment he died, even without a succession crisis. He was was in a unique position and uniquely talented for his time.

>>1797968
The world at that time wasn't very large. If he conquered India and Arabia and made gains into more of Africa, central Asia and Europe, and consolidated those places under his rule, we would see Avery different world today.

>>1797995

If you redefine "whole world" to mean just those regions, the answer is still no.

The manpower needed to maintain those borders is beyond what he could have mustered.

>>1797942

>Picture yourself saying to yours grandsons:¨I conquer the world¨

>beyond saying "I was the guy who did it"?

Anon, you cited the exact reason OP's question was exclusionary towards.

>>1797911
>if his soldiers didn't mutiny?
This is such a big if.
It's like having an army of mindless drone soldiers that would do anything for you.

could he have conquered china?

>>1797911
>Could he have actually conquered the whole world if his soldiers didn't mutiny?

No.

>Is there any value in conquering the world

No.

>>1797995
Not really, no. Besides possibly turning back westwards to face with emerging Rome and Carthage, Greek/Macedonian conquest didn't really very long lasting influence or impact on the people he conquered. The most glaring example being the Iranians.

>>1797911
He could've conquered most of the old world at most.

No army from antiquity could survive the trip from Siberia to America let alone a long term campaign there. Also Alex would probably never find the inhabited Islands in the pacific leading him to not truly conquer the world.

File: 1475874958989.png (296KB, 716x426px) Image search: [Google]

296KB, 716x426px

>>1798384
>Seleukids maintain control the entire Iranian plateau for close to 70 years, and spend most of the rest of their existence trying to take it back
>Parthian kings who took it from them style themselves φιλέλλην for the next 400+ years
>"Greek/Macedonian conquest didn't really very long lasting influence or impact on the people he conquered... The most glaring example being the Iranians."

kill yourself

>>1798313
Is this a joke?

>>1798313
I would be surprised if Alexander's army lost more than a 1000 men in a battle against any chinese army. The chinese are short and small and alexander's tactics would have taken a clear advantage over this.

>>1798558

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_Heavenly_Horses

>>1798492
Parthians were not Greek boos for 400 years, you fucking retard. They removed their Hellenisticbooism by the middle of their dynasty's reign because native Iranian peoples like the Persians and Medes were constantly revolting against their alien fascination with Greek culture.

Are you fucking stupid?

>>1798313
Only if he conscripted the armies of India.

>>1797911
No. He didn't have anywhere near the manpower, and the Persian obsession with lightly equipped infantry that focused on shooting made his life MUCH easier.

As you go west, you get people like the gauls, and samnites, who would require very different tactics to defeat.

>>1797995
>alexander would totally conquer india, just like in my total war games.

>>1797911
Yes, maybe, no.

Maybe he wanted to be the first to explore and push the limits. Maybe he wanted to leave his mark behind. Maybe he felt the world was divide and wanted to unite all under a single banner.

None of us were Alexander The Great so how could anyone truly know what was going on in his head?

Could he have actually conquered the whole world if his soldiers didn't mutiny?
The real "whole world" certainly not, the classic "whole world" most likely not, and even if he did it would have started collapsing even before his death.

Is there any value in conquering the world beyond saying "I was the guy who did it"?
Only if you then bring something to the table that benefits the conquered nations, like a unified currency or alphabet to ease trade and the exchange of ideas and technology. Which Alexander didn't.