re: History Question about Alexander the Great

His troops were already threatening mutiny in India. Alexander had to turn back. The problem was Alexander had no desire to actually maintain his empire, only expand. Had he lived, his army would have demanded to return home for a couple years. He would have had to basically build a new army. He proved that he had the ability to lead his troops, but would he be able to keep the peace? What happens when his armies aren't marching across Afghanistan and the locals decide to stop paying taxes? What does he do if while putting down that revolt, Egypt flares up? Could he hold it together, rebuild his army, build the infrastructure of the empire, and then press forward and finish off the Indians and Chinese? I just don't see it.

Alexander's lack of an heir showed his inability and complete lack of desire to do what was necessary to maintain an empire. That's why he is known as a great conqueror and not a great ruler. The empire was always going to die with him.