Was he really that great?

It wasn't his fault his wife was preggers when he died and his generals were greedy pieces of shit

Why didn't he name a heir?

Because the disease/poison struck so fast he didn't have time to do shit

> Refering to the diadochi as normies.

U better be jokin'

If anything the problem was that his generals were to great themselves and as such couldn't unite behind one strong man.

If you're remembered millennia after your death, you're obviously great.

Stop these autistic threads.

Great conqueror, great leader. Mediocre king, maybe even bad.

As for Alexander completely deserves the title "the Great" specially considering the kind of people who also got it. I mean, even the fucking client roman king of Judea Herod is "the Great". The seleucid king everyone makes fun of here is also called "the Great" (although he did way more than losing against romans).

That's why I prefer the spanish and italian version where he is called "Magno" instead of the generic "grande", keeping the meaning but putting him aside of the rest of hundreds of "greats".

>would of

As far as I know, he did not have son or child of any kind, and like said, it happened very quickly and unexpectedly, which is also one of the reasons it fell apart so quickly after his demise

So hold up

You have time to conquer over 60 cities over the course of a few years and destroy the greatest power on earth at that time, but you can't take a few minutes out of the day to think about what might happen to your great empire if you die? And it's not like suddenly he got sick one morning and died in the afternoon.

>great themselves and as such couldn't unite behind one strong man
>perdiccas is reasonable, allows the partition of babylon
>diadochi rebel

I would say that it would be quite natural to see his soon-to be born son as the natural heir. The problem was finding a regent that wouldn't be opposed by any of the strong men behind Alexander.

If we know one thing about Alexander is that he was a cocky and arrogant bastard, who probably thought he'd live forever.

And yes, he literally got sick and died in 11 days

He had at least one son, he was protected as his heir for like 10 years before finally being murdered.

...

>And yes, he literally got sick and died in 11 days

Sounds like some Eazy-E shit

Who murdered Alexander?

He lived through multiple wounds including one that was severe enough it took a full 6 months to recover.

He also legitimately thought he was the son of Zeus.

Thinking he was immortal really isn't a far stretch to imagine.

Guy had so many enemies and people wanting him dead it's like asking who would've killed Hitler

Why does Alexander look like a gypsy?

He was quite young still, and from reading about him, it seems he had quite the hubris (maybe not surprising considering) I don't really think he thought he would die. Several sources (and I know that basically all sources related to Alexander are considered in part or wholly unreliable but still) say he thought of himself as the son of Zeus and or Ammon.

This
What he would be like if a formerly Irrelevant third World Country suddenly conquered America

Eh, Persia was recovering after a series of rebellions and never had a strong core military to begin with. The king, when he went campaigning, tended to pick up mercs along the way a la Carthage.

>Calanus was likely to be a Hindu Naga sadhu, whom Greeks called gymnosophists. He had accompanied the Greek army back from Punjab, upon request by Alexander. He was seventy-three years of age at that time. However, when Persian weather and travel fatigue weakened him, he informed Alexander that he would rather die than live disabled. He decided to take away his life by self-immolation. Although Alexander tried to desist him from doing so but upon the insistence of Calanus, Alexander relented and the job of building a pyre was entrusted to Ptolemy. The place where this incident took place was Susa in the year 323 B.C. Calanus is mentioned also by Alexander's admiral, Nearchus and Chares of Mytilene. He did not flinch as he burnt to the astonishment of those who watched. Before, immolating himself alive on the pyre, his last words to Alexander were "We shall meet in Babylon".

Yes, but still the odds were not exactly in Alexanders favour.

Both.

He had a son, but Roxanne and Alexander Jr. were sentenced to death by Cassander

Macedonia wasn't irrelevant at the time. It was a regional powerhouse, with an impressive military, who had just managed to put much of southern balkan under its hegemonic leadership.

I have heard something about this Alexander IV before, but is there any source which "confirms" this?

>Some years Calanus arrives to Babylon
>"Where is that Alexander-boy? I'm sure he's gonna love my dank prank"
>"What do you mean he died?"

Confirms what?

livius.org/articles/person/alexander-iv/?

It's all I have.

Alexander's son (Alexander IV) existence

You mean other than primary sources that discuss his stewardship, capture, and death?

The Hellenistic era left more records than any other period in history apart from the Roman era.

It left so much material, with so much detail about daily life and politics and diplomacy that we didn't even begin to study it until the 20th century.

There is no question that Roxanne birthed a child to Alexander and he lived into his teens iirc.

I see no reason why you should doubt in his existence, since both he and his retarded half uncle are recorded as being used by pawns by the Diadochi

Why wasn't the Seleucid Empire as great as the Macedonian one?

Well I recently read a book about Alexander by Paul Cartledge, and in this book he talks in length about the unreliable or missing sources (A lot of the original sources are lost to time and some of the more complete "sources" are written hundreds of years later) concerning Alexander's life and later conquest, but are you saying that other sources confirm his existence? I agree though that his existence would seem likely

...

There are a lot of surviving sources but most references, even if centuries old, directly quote or claim to quote Ptolemy and other primary sources we have since lost to time.

I'm not going to dig up sources to prove Alexander IV was real because you choose not to accept scholarly consensus.

And most misinformation about Alexander is a result of the Alexander Romance. Modern historians do not use the Alexander Romance any longer.

> because you choose not to accept scholarly consensus.
I did say that I thought his existence seemed likely, its just that I don't know which source confirms this, i'm not trying to disprove his existence i'm only curious. But if you don't know which, i'll accept that.

Couldn't Hellenize the little shits (wasn't able or willing) so they had to rely on rather small numbers of Greek colonists or various native peoples who hated their guts (like the Jews).

Kim Kardashian was greater than him baka desu senpai.

Well
According to progressive Liberals Armenians are an oppressed non-white minority, and according to Conservatives at least 50% are shit skins.

Sooo
>non-white
>woman
>coal burner
>father is transgender

Only thing about her SJW's would dislike is the fact she is a mother.
John Green would most definitely consider her 'the Great'.