Who was the real successor to Alexander?

**Laevex** · 10-31-2007, 16:33

After skimming over an article by Charles Edson, I have come to wonder whether Seleukos Nikator was not the one to continue Alexander's objectives. He was, after all, the one who secured the biggest chunk of the newly conquered Makedonian Empire.

Any other thoughts on this?

**pseudocaesar** · 10-31-2007, 16:43

After the battle of Ipsus, and the defeat of Antigonos, no one else was strong enough to definitively defeat the other successors. Had Antigonos won at Ipsus, then all of Macedonia, Asia Minor and Seleukos' eastern territories would have instantly became his, thus reforming Alexanders empire.

**Tellos Athenaios** · 10-31-2007, 16:47

In terms of "by law" => Phyrrhos (of Epeiros). After all he's family.

**Bootsiuv** · 10-31-2007, 18:06

Perdiccas. Well....he was supposed to be anyways. I actually just got a pretty informative book on this....the entire situation was quite confusing. All kinds of rulers supporting all kinds of others, with alliances changing on a whim...

**dominique** · 10-31-2007, 18:06

Ze great question!

Alexander mumbled something on his deathbed that confused everybody and opened the gate to widespread warfare between anybody who could get a couple thousand guys with pikes.

It sounded vaguely like:

Krateurrr-eurgh

Did he meant :

1-Krateroi (to Krateros)
2-Kratistôi (to the strongest)
3-Give me that Krater full of wine, I'm thirsty by Zeus!

It's everybody's guess.

Krateros missed the boss' death, missed the succession and stupidly falled from his horse on a cavalry charge less than two years later. Three strikes, you're out.

After that, the free for all. It's a worse read than the king plays by Shakespeare. The who' stabbed/poisoned/bitchslapped who of the makedonians kings is quite tedious actually. Bottom line; the romans and the parthians splitted the kingdom in half less than two hundred years after Alexander's death.

To answer you frankly, Alexander had no true heir. And no one showed up.
The diadochus were the worst kind of land pirates until Timur and his piles of skulls.

**Bootsiuv** · 10-31-2007, 18:24

A quote from Hellenistic Civilization by W.W. Tarn (revised by he and G.T. Griffith)

'The arrangements made by the army after his [alexander's] death vested the kingship jointly in his idiot half-brother Phillip III and his posthumous son by Roxane, Alexander IV: his general Perdiccas had the effective control of Asia, and Antipater in Europe.'

In 321, war broke out between Antipater, Antigonus, and Ptolemy against Perdiccas. Perdiccas was murdered, and Antipater ruled a united empire until his death in 319....after that, all hell broke loose apparently.

**Andronikos** · 10-31-2007, 18:52

I wold say that the most successful successor (from the first generation) was Ptolemaios, but he wanted only Egypt and knew that there is nobody able to rule all the Alexandros empire. He made Egypt the greatest power in the mediterranean but later kings ruined this.
And the true heir - Alexandros IV.

I have seen the movie Alexander by Oliver Stone, so what do you think about it? (if there is such thread, please post a link)

**Bootsiuv** · 10-31-2007, 18:56

Too confusing....flash-forwards, flash-backwards, I think they're was even a flash-sideways in there somewhere...

I enjoyed it because it was a 'historical' (and I use that term loosely) film with battle scenes....aside from that, the oft-scholarly despised 'Gladiator' was a much better movie IMO.

*awaits the inevitable flame for that one*