What if?

[amyntoros]

"If Bessus had believed that Alexander would kill Darius, then why would he not have handed him over to Alexander instead of making himself a regicide?"Good point, but Bessus may *not* have believed this to be true - and Alexander could have delayed for five days because he had received information that there was dissension in Darius' camp and decided to wait it out for a while. I'm willing to believe that Alexander had spies everywhere - he often made his own fortune, as has been said - and he did receive word that Darius had been deposed, didn't he? And Alexander, always in the forefront of everything, was not the first to arrive and "find" Darius which adds to my suspicions.It's like High Noon for you Andrew on this topic, isn't it? There must be others here who support your views. J. M. O'Brien in ATG: The Invisible Enemy thinks that "The king had intended to capture Darius alive and ceremoniously accept his abdication and submission," if that's any consolation. There are surely other scholars who share this view, but O'Brien's comment stuck with me because I reread the book recently and (obviously) didn't agree with this particular statement.Best regards,Amyntoros

[kenny]

Andrew SorryYour above arguement for me really does make it a little more suspicios. As linda said Alexander had spies and indeed noses to the ground In all fairness and people know I back Alexander to the hilt.It shows to me Alexander knew the situation and gave it that time for Darius to die.As you said Alexander was ruthless in his chasing and following if he was that determined he wouldnt have waited for Darius to accept any prior arrangement. hed have chased him caught him then done his dealing.Its evident in the way he chased Bessus and any other rebels he chased them till they couldnt breath. He could chase bessus in that way and do what he wanted with Bessus one way or another Bessus was a dead man.For Alexander to leave Darius alive was as to Elizabeth 1st Leaving mary queen of Scots alive.Darius would always be regarded as a true king of persia through who he was and Alexander always a upstart and pretender.For Alexander to be overlord of the Persian Empire Darius had to go.. As the line from Colin Farrel in the movie said.As the worlk can not have 2 sons Asia cant bear 2 Kings.kenny

[marcus]

Hi Andrew,Well, I'd like to agree with you, but I'm not so sure - it's very easy, with hindsight ... and Alexander was never put to the test. Perhaps he would have treated Darius well, fully expecting there to be some sort of revolt, at which he could act with extreme ruthlessness and be fully justified in doing so ...ATBMarcus

[beausefaless]

Kennyx,I was starting to wonder about you. I mean, I was going to take a slow boat south of China then hit the big Island and give you a swift kick in the rear and after your *Hyde* was back on the straight and narrow I'd head back home. It's good to see you back!

[heinrich]

Who says Alexander did not get Darius alive? We have only Macedonian agitprop. I think a case can be made that Alexander simply killed his enemy.HM

[kenny]

Andrew Brother Of The swordThanks for your remarks. If you ever are in that vicinity of China and come across our not so big Island. Your always welcome over my threshold.Im not back regular As I got fed up of rowing and people finding afront with my particular take on Alexander.I just wanted to reply to mr Chuggs comment whos opinions I like and book I read but felt on this occasion off the mark.Cheers Andrew

[Taphoi]

I'm not actually alone in this Linda. Some very eminent Alexander historians agree with me. For example, NGL Hammond reaches essentially the same conclusion:"[Alexander] intended to make Darius king over Persia and whatever territory Alexander chose to go with Persia." Alexander the Great (1981), pp.170-1My only novel contribution (as far as I know) is the curious matter of the 5 day sojourn.Best wishes,Andrew

[jan]

Alexander had wanted to kill KIng Darius himself, so the historians say, but I would imagine that if he didn't do it at the Battle of Issus that Sisygambis would have convinced him to pardon him in some manner had he caught him alive after that. She had a great influence on Alexander.

[THEGREATESTEVER]

Hello Marcus,Though I agree with your statement that ATG was probably relieved that he didn't have to make that decision, I would add that Darius would have served him well as a vasal to quell the Persian uprise. This could have allowed ATG to go further than he went and in a shorter time. Eventually, of course, he would have to have him killed. P.S. It's been a while, you know me...how've you been?

[amyntoros]

I only bought HammondGÇÖs biography recently and I gave it to a professor before I had the time to read it (long story), but IGÇÖm not at all surprised that there are respected scholars who support your viewpoint. I think that some of it depends how other events are perceived. Did Alexander really return PorusGÇÖ kingdom out of admiration and to show his magnanimity, or was he demonstrating his superb political acumen in that he had no other choice but to find a suitable native ruler to leave in charge of India? I lean towards the latter in that I canGÇÖt see what else he could have done. He couldnGÇÖt possibly leave large enough garrisons throughout the Indian nations in order to establish or maintain Macedonian supremacy. He *needed* loyal allies on the fringes of his empire and he knew just how to get them.!The same applies to AlexanderGÇÖs appointment of various Persian satraps GÇô it wasnGÇÖt untoward generosity but a brilliant policy which meant that rule could be maintained during his absence, and to the average Persian there was the appearance that nothing much had changed except the name of the king. Though openly, and some may say, overly, generous to his friends, Alexander chose very carefully when to show similar generosity to his enemies. So I ask myself GÇô did he need Darius alive to firmly establish his rule over Persia? Did he need to be magnanimous towards a living Darius? The answer is no, but the GÇ£appearanceGÇ¥ of having intended to be so noble was a stroke of genius as far as Persian perceptions were concerned.However, from the Greek and Macedonian perspective, Alexander reestablishing Darius as king of the Persians would surely have caused horror amongst them! What Athenian could continue to have accepted AlexanderGÇÖs campaign as one of revenge against the Persians should he have returned Darius to the throne? What Macedonian soldier wouldnGÇÖt have thought heGÇÖd lost his mind?! But once Darius was dead, it didnGÇÖt really matter what Alexander said he had *intended* to do, though even then I think it might have been disturbing to the army. To me, the whole thing smacks of an absolutely splendid publicity campaign that might not actually have been presented to the general Greek and Macedonian population at that time. It was to AlexanderGÇÖs benefit that the *Persians* believed he was capable of such actions, not his own people. By the time Alexander returned Porus to rule, IGÇÖm sure his army would have been more understanding, despite the

[amyntoros]

By the time Alexander returned Porus to rule, I'm sure his army would have been more understanding, despite the fact that they had already expressed dissatisfaction at his generosity towards the Indians. After all, what trusted Companion *wanted* to be left behind in India to maintain Macedonian supremacy, if it were even logistically possible? It seems that even Cleitus was disaffected by his satrapy appointment, it being as far from home and/or the rich heart of the empire as it was.Capturing Darius alive, returning his family to him and giving him back his title only makes sense if one is considering how it would have been perceived by the Persians. But to keep the confidence and devotion of his own army, Alexander needed a dead Persian king. I'm not above believing that Alexander sent soldiers ahead of himself into Darius' camp to make sure that this is exactly what he got. Best regards,Amyntoros

[dean]

Hello,My opinion is that Alexander would have been tempted to show his magnanimity- and for the same reason he didn't kill Darius' family he would never have killed Darius himself.I don't think, either, that Alexander would have gone to the other extreme, as suggested by Mary Renault, that he was somehow thwarted by Darius' unexpected death, so he couldn't reunite him with his wife.Alexander though certainly knew how to win the people and killing Darius certainly wouldn't have helped him do this. In my opinion it would have been a tactical error.Best regards,
Dean.

[marcus]

The five-day delay could, of course, have been to ensure that Bessus and his cronies were that much more committed to their perfidy, so that when he *did* catch up they really had no choice themselves but to despatch Darius. After all, he was happy to forgive Satibarzanes and Nabarzanes (although Satibarzanes then betrayed his trust) ... had Bessus not run off to Bactria and assumed the purple, and instead submitted to Alexander, would Alexander not have forgiven him, too?ATBMarcus

[beausefaless]

Alexander had the up-most respect for all the good fighting warriors from the primitive fighters up along the Danube, The Campaign of Consolidation, The Campaign in Asia Minor, The Campaign in Eastern Persia, The Asiatic campaign, and The Indian Campaign with the exceptions that had to be made at sieges at Tyre and Gaza but he still showed some mercy especially at the siege of the seven cities.Make no mistake, he wanted to kill Darius at Issus and Gaugamela with extreme prejudice. Now did Alexander feel Darius was a coward for escaping Issus or did he believe Darius had no choice but to save himself to save his empire by re-grouping to fight another day, no doubt it was the later.But towards the end of Gaugamela Alexander knew Darius was a coward but he was still a *king* with plenty of charisma. Gaugamela was the grand prize, "winner take all." There is no way on this earth he could let him live. Alexander had enough trouble with a few individuals he appointed as Satraps that became corrupted of different part of the known world. If Alexander placed his cloche upon Darius's dead body it was because Darius was a *king* and because of this reason he had Darius buried with full military honors. If Alexander would have killed Darius himself it would have made no difference.Alexander treated many men, women, and children that were his enemy with respect but he also killed and sold many others into slavery, he was no saint. Amyntoros and Jan were spot on with their reasoning with Poras.Sorry ace, with respect, I completely disagree with your analysis but this was a very good subject.Adios, Andrew

[xxx]

Andrew you're right on the money on this. There is nothing quite so spectacular as having the King of Persia report to you as a lesser King to legitimize your rule to both sides, and nothing better than giving a man back his life and marrying into his family as a mark of honor to ensure his absolute loyalty.Alexander took great stock in the fact that a man treated honorably would return the favor to him and as you point out he does this time and time again. We tend to imbue him with modernistic concepts of politics rather than his own rather unique ones that made him so successful.However, as he was to find out, far more often than he would have liked to admit, the honorable ones were few and far between