Skip to content

The Legacy of Alexander: How the Great Conqueror‘s Death Sparked a Cataclysmic Succession Crisis


The year was 323 BCE. Alexander III of Macedon, better known to history as Alexander the Great, had spent the last 13 years carving out the largest empire the world had yet seen, stretching from Greece to India. But that June, at the height of his power and only 32 years old, he fell ill and suddenly died in Babylon, leaving no clear heir or succession plan for his unprecedented realm. What followed was arguably the most momentous and consequential succession crisis in ancient history, as rival generals waged bloody wars to claim pieces of an empire that had been held together by one man‘s ambition and force of will.

To understand the seismic impact of Alexander‘s death, we must first examine how he and his father Philip II transformed Macedonia from a backwater kingdom into the preeminent power of the Hellenic world in a single generation. United under the generalship of Philip, the Macedonians perfected the combined arms tactics of cavalry and infantry that laid the groundwork for his son‘s future conquests.[^1] Invading the Achaemenid Persian Empire in 334 BCE with an army of 40,000 hardened Macedonian troops, Alexander annihilated Persian armies many times his strength and within a decade had subjugated lands from Egypt to the Indus River valley.[^2]

But this breathtaking conquest had no clear political end goal, and Alexander‘s failure to lay out a stable succession would prove fatal to the integrity of his empire. His only offspring was an unborn child by his Bactrian wife Roxana, and his next closest male relative was his mentally disabled half-brother Philip III Arrhidaeus.[^3] On his deathbed in Babylon, Alexander‘s generals reportedly asked to whom he bequeathed his kingdom, to which he cryptically replied: "to the strongest."[^4]

Infighting and Instability

News of Alexander‘s death in June 323 BCE sparked unrest across his empire. Athens launched an ill-fated revolt against Macedonian hegemony and mercenary troops in the eastern satrapies mutinied.[^5] But the epicenter of the growing storm was Babylon itself, the prospective capital where Alexander‘s generals began to vie for control of the corpse.

Perdiccas, the senior officer entrusted with the king‘s signet ring, tried to consolidate power as regent for Alexander‘s unborn son, posthumously named Alexander IV. But this bid was challenged by an infantry commander named Meleager, who championed the kingship of Alexander‘s half-brother Philip III Arrhidaeus and rallied a large contingent of restless Macedonian troops to his cause.[^6] After a tense standoff and brief civil war, Perdiccas lured Meleager and the other ringleaders out from behind Babylon‘s walls under the guise of a truce, only to have them trampled to death by elephants as a gory object lesson.[^7]

With that bloody purge, Perdiccas formally established a joint kingship of Philip III and the infant Alexander IV, with himself as regent. To appease the ambitions of his fellow generals and secure their loyalty, he parceled out satrapies (provinces) at the Partition of Babylon in 323 BCE:[^8]

General Satrapy
Ptolemy Egypt & Libya
Laomedon Syria & Phoenicia
Philotas Cilicia
Peithon Media
Antigonus Phrygia, Lycia, Pamphylia
Asander Caria
Menander Lydia
Lysimachus Thrace
Leonnatus Hellespontine Phrygia
Neoptolemus Armenia
Peucestas Persis
Tlepolemus Carmania
Peithon Babylon
Archon Mesopotamia
Stasanor Bactria & Sogdiana

But this compromise only bought a temporary respite. Perdiccas‘ rivals, especially Ptolemy in Egypt and Antigonus in Phrygia, chafed at his supremacy and began to build up their own power bases. When Ptolemy hijacked Alexander‘s embalmed corpse on its way to Macedon in 322 BCE and enshrined it in Alexandria, it was a clear declaration of independence.[^9]

Wars of the Successors

Open warfare between the Diadochi (successors) broke out in 322 BCE, with Perdiccas leading an army to retake Egypt from Ptolemy. But after several defeats, Perdiccas was assassinated by his own officers, throwing the regency into turmoil.[^10] At the Partition of Triparadisus in 320 BCE, the victorious coalition redistributed the satrapies, this time with Antipater, the respected regent of Macedon and Alexander‘s former second-in-command, taking the lead role.[^11]

Yet this new arrangement also proved tenuous. After Antipater‘s death the next year, another round of internecine conflict engulfed the Macedonian Empire, as a shifting web of alliances and rivalries between the Diadochi took shape:

  • Ptolemy solidified his hold over Egypt and expanded into Cyrenaica, Cyprus, and parts of Syria.
  • Seleucus, the former satrap of Babylon, was ousted by Antigonus but fled east to Ptolemy and eventually reconquered his domains.
  • Antigonus Monophthalmus ("the One-Eyed") seized vast territories in Anatolia and clashed with Ptolemy and Seleucus.
  • Lysimachus, ruler of Thrace, sided with Ptolemy and Seleucus against the growing power of Antigonus.
  • Cassander, Antipater‘s son, murdered Alexander IV and his mother Roxana, ending the Argead dynasty.[^12]

The latter half of the fourth century BCE saw incessant warfare between these successor states, with the "game of thrones" producing new kings and casualties with each shuffling of the deck. While Antigonus made the most concerted effort to reunite Alexander‘s empire, his dream died with him at the Battle of Ipsus in 301 BCE.[^13]

Hellenistic World

In the wake of Antigonus‘s failed bid for supremacy, three major dynastic realms emerged from the wreckage of Alexander‘s empire:

  1. The Ptolemaic Kingdom in Egypt and neighboring regions, ruled by the descendants of Ptolemy
  2. The Seleucid Empire, stretching from Anatolia and the Levant to modern Afghanistan and Pakistan
  3. Macedon and its Antipatrid/Antigonid kings, who dominated the Greek mainland

Though these Hellenistic kingdoms were built on ceaseless slaughter and strife between Alexander‘s successors, they still oversaw a flourishing of Greek culture, trade, art, and science in the lands the conqueror had once subjugated. The Ptolemaic capital of Alexandria became the foremost center of learning in the Mediterranean, with its Great Library amassing hundreds of thousands of texts.[^14] Antioch in Syria and Seleucia on the Tigris grew into cosmopolitan metropolises, while Greek-style architecture, sculpture, and pottery shaped the aesthetics of the age.

Even as the Hellenistic rulers waged wars against each other and faced internal revolts, they continued Alexander‘s policies of founding new Greek cities and settlements from Egypt to Central Asia, spreading Greek language, culture and populations across Southwest Asia and the Eastern Mediterranean.[^15] Indeed, Greek remained the lingua franca of commerce and government across these regions until the Muslim conquests a thousand years later.


Despite their many achievements, the Hellenistic states faced the same problem that Alexander had left unsolved – how to maintain a stable political union across such culturally diverse lands and populations. One by one, they succumbed to the rising power of Rome in the west and Parthia in the east, with Cleopatra VII, the last queen of Ptolemaic Egypt, committing suicide in 30 BCE after her defeat by Octavian.[^16]

Would Alexander the Great‘s empire have endured if he had lived longer or left a clear line of succession? It‘s one of the great unanswerable questions of history. The conqueror had grand ambitions of further invasions into Arabia and North Africa, but his untimely demise and the disunity that followed made these impossible.[^17] Instead of a unified realm under a centralized Macedonian dynasty, Alexander‘s former dominion fractured into several rival states that were eventually gobbled up by Rome and Parthia.

In the end, the Macedonian king‘s failure to grapple with the political ramifications of his conquests or establish a tenable succession was his perhaps his greatest shortcoming. For want of a clear heir, the Hellenistic world descended into 50 years of bloody warfare, squandering the chance for Alexander‘s vision of a lasting empire to be realized. The Diadochi‘s own ruthless ambitions, once channeled so effectively in service to their king‘s glory, proved to be the very force that tore that glory apart.

The Wars of the Successors that engulfed the Mediterranean world after 323 BCE may well represent the most momentous and fateful succession crisis in ancient history, as one man‘s death triggered a domino effect that quite literally determined the maps and power structures of the next several centuries. It is a testament to the inextricable link between political stability and the rule of law, and a warning against the dangers of concentrating too much power in a single leader without a clear plan for what comes next.

[^1]: Worthington, Ian. "Philip II of Macedonia." Yale University Press, 2008, pp. 31-67.
[^2]: Briant, Pierre. "Alexander the Great and His Empire: A Short Introduction." Princeton University Press, 2012, p. 10.
[^3]: Green, Peter. "Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic Age." Phoenix, 2008, p. 12.
[^4]: Plutarch. "The Life of Alexander the Great." Penguin Classics, 2011, 77.5-6.
[^5]: Diodorus Siculus. "Bibliotheca Historica." Book XVIII, 9.1.
[^6]: Waterfield, Robin. "Dividing the Spoils: The War for Alexander the Great‘s Empire." Oxford University Press, 2011, pp. 11-18.
[^7]: Anson, Edward M. "The Partition of Babylon." The Classical Quarterly, vol. 66, no. 2, 2016, pp. 574-585.
[^8]: Grainger, John D. "The Rise of the Seleukid Empire (323-223 BC)." Pen and Sword, 2014, pp. 42-46.
[^9]: Pausanias. "Description of Greece." Book I, 6.3.
[^10]: Howe, Timothy. "Perdiccas and the Sinews of the Macedonian Empire." The Classical Quarterly, vol. 61, no. 1, 2011, pp. 277-282.
[^11]: Bosworth, Albert Brian. "The Legacy of Alexander: Politics, Warfare, and Propaganda under the Successors." Oxford University Press, 2002, pp. 81-94.
[^12]: Justin. "Epitome of the Philippic History of Pompeius Trogus." Book XV, 2.3-5.
[^13]: Billows, Richard A. "Kings and Colonists: Aspects of Macedonian Imperialism." Brill, 1995, pp. 107-124.
[^14]: MacLeod, Roy M., ed. "The Library of Alexandria: Centre of Learning in the Ancient World." Bloomsbury Publishing, 2004, pp. 1-16.
[^15]: Shipley, Graham. "The Greek World After Alexander: 323-30 BC." Routledge, 2000, pp. 30-47.
[^16]: Bringmann, Klaus. "A History of the Roman Republic." Polity, 2007, pp. 192-211.
[^17]: Kosmin, Paul J. "The Land of the Elephant Kings: Space, Territory, and Ideology in the Seleucid Empire." Harvard University Press, 2014, pp. 22-35.