What if: Alexander never died in Babylon?

Gone on to conquer more countries and kill more people.

"He is known as Alexander the Great because he killed more people of more different kinds than any other man of his time."
Will Cuppy, The Decline and Fall of Practically Everybody. [1950], p. 41

Yes I've also heard that he was one of the greatest mass murderors of all time, well for his time.. He had plans to subdue the Arabians.. that would have failed..

Who knows? The Arabs weren't very organized back then. They're not really organized now, either; if they were, we wouldn't have Saydi Arabia and Yemen and Kuwai and the Arab Emirates etc. But they were even less organized back then, just disparate groups of desert-dwelling nomads. Alexander had little difficulty in overcoming a kindred tribe -- the Hebrews.

eventually would he have turned toward carthage and finally rome???

I'm not sure at what stage of development Carthage was at that time in history. Rome was still a small kingdom, ruled by the Tarquin kings who were Etruscan, not Latin, I believe.

Where is Setanta when we need him?

but no doubt, with all the empire he had, he would have had a huge army which to take carthage.. yep carthage was powerful but the greek syracusian tyrants had succeeded in holding back their expansion plans into Sicily... for centuries...

What makes him a mass murderer? The fact that he waged war and people died? Maybe they should have surrendered...

Re: What if: Alexander never died in Babylon?


Reach the moon...

Exactly, DES -- "the fact that he waged war and people died." Do you mean to suggest that a war of aggression, waged for no other reason than to acquire more land and subjugate a greater number of people, is in some sense justified? Alexander was a megalomaniac, intent on taking over as much of the world he knew as he could. Alexander, Julius Caesar, Napoleon Bonaparte, Hitler, many others -- they are all mass murderers.

Forgotten Stalin...

Right. Greatest mass murderer of all time.

Rumour has it that Chairman Mao has pipped Stalin to the top of the league of bloodthirsty murderors...

Yeah, that may be true. But Mao killed mainly his own Chinese people. Stalin was an equal-opportunity murderer who would exterminate anybody at all, regardless of race, religion, ethnicity or sexual orientation. In the 1930s, particularly at risk were the people closest to him, the ones who had boosted him into power in the first place.

the purges...

If he hadn't died in Babylon, then there was a good chance he would have expanded eastwards from Egypt, or from Greece/Macedonia. He was an expansionist, and he hungered for domination of the known world. Unless he were to be assassinated or killed prematurely by some other means, then he would never have stopped until he'd died of old age.

If he had expanded from Egypt, then he could have taken Carthage and on, up to Gibraltar. From there he could have gone on to take Spain, then north and east to take Europe and Rome. Rome and Carthage were just city-states at this time, so they wouldn't have posed much of a threat. From there who knows? He could proceed to take the British Isles, eastern Europe, or he could have chosen to go south into Africa. He had no opposition.

There would be little difference if he had expanded from Greece/Macedonia.

Again, like my argument in the thread concerning Hitler and World War II, these are my views, and my opinions. Not the way it WOULD have happened.