Search results

Maybe I read different books, or that was "old science" or I misremember what I read :) The crazy was strong in that one - yup. His adversaries were astonished by assaults led by a heirless monarch wielding bog breath from yesterday's drunken orgy :p

AFAIK Alexander did break up the phalanx into smaller pieces supported by light/medium foot, this being his contribution to the art of war. And this was the norm during the Hellenistic Age. Hellenistic states could field so many hoplites/sarrisophoroi that lumping them into a single unit was...

Hmm ... the possibility that Alexander sacks Rome and sells off its population into slavery makes me rethink my stance on "no Macedonian rampage" in Iberia, Gaul and Italy ...

I've lived in Portugal - IMO it'd be warmer - or at least less "continental" - and wetter. Much wetter. But crops should stay same - corn and olives and vine and lentils. Plus "moo", "baa", "brah", "oink" and "cluck-cluck".. Different fish. Better access to timber?

Naturally, my view of the issue may be a brainfart :)

As @raharris1973 said - Alexander was marching through more or less civilised, developed or semi-developed areas. Roads! Or at least established trade routes. Here - be it Iberia and Gaul, or North Africa - not so much. His ability to live off the land, his ability to bring up money and troops...

No Hellenism, no Christianity, no Islam, Judaism/Samaritanianism (sp?) remain single(ish) temple centric. Any state that Alexander builds will collapse the moment he dies. If not sooner. There will be Greco-Macedonian conquest of most of Iberia - all that half empty land next to overpopulated...