1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Alternate History Thread IV: The Sequel

Discussion in 'Never Ending Stories' started by Dachs, Jun 5, 2007.

  1. ~Darkening~

    ~Darkening~ Weep, Mother.

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2006
    Messages:
    3,766
    Location:
    Roanoke, Virginia
    Technically, Lāhainā is among the worst places to place a capital. Droughts are regular, and Lāhainā was the capital for only twenty-five years, 1820-45.The core reason the city was chosen as the capital came from the whaling boats, and the somewhat quasi-logic behind it results in the evntual movement. Technically, the capital on the map is located at Pukalani (central isle), rather than Lāhainā (the western coast). There are one or two other acceptable sites (depednign on the focus of the kingdom), but generally the Honolulu area should be reserved as the capital.
     
  2. Disenfrancised

    Disenfrancised Beep Beep

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2004
    Messages:
    5,601
    Location:
    Only the News You Need
    Just goes to show that nothing good ever comes of a powerful France :D.
     
  3. Cannae

    Cannae Philosophy of Poverty

    Joined:
    May 20, 2006
    Messages:
    2,241
    Location:
    Johto
    I was pondering about various random ideas when I thought up of a time line. What I thought of is just the events. I need help by being given constructive criticism and be given imput about how to make this better. By the way when I mean, constructive criticism I am asking for a particular detail to be shown to me and be given an alternative to what I said. In other words I would like not to have comments of this type over here... please (especially when no alternative given) ---> OMG! This is TOTAL CRAP! THIS sucks like bull! Lame idea!!

    480 BC(E) ~ The second invasion of Greece by King Xerxes occurs with a decisive victory for the Persians at the battle of marathon and the conquest of Greece.

    September of 476 BC(E) ~ King Xerxes encouraged by the decisive victory attempts to attack and conquer Egypt. However a major setback occurred when an combined force of Greek rebels and a Egyptian Army ambushed the Persians and caused them to have a major defeat. The defeat costed him his newly conquered empire... Well almost that is.

    September/October of 476 BC(E) ~ However the next couple of days just when the King Xerxes was on a breaking point he said that he was receiving a vision from the gods saing something to him. He said he saw in his dream the constant death and rebirth of himself unveiling itself. At one point in the dream he came up to this place with the three supreme gods standing above him. The gods who called themselves Brahman, Vishnu and Shiva said he would be blessed if Xerxes made his solders put up banners and paint their shields with the holy symbol. He told his advisers about this dream he had and gave them the orders to do what he was told to do by the three gods. He along with his people were very doubtful that the orders Xerxes gave would do anything. Just at the lowest point of battle when he thought he would lose and his solders flee a miracle happened. His solders for no apparent reason began to gain the lost morale. Before long they were at peak condition. Then out of nowhere hundreds of elite solders came which then turned the tide of the battle and caused him win the battle. He of of course gave the credit of his victory to the supreme gods, converted and then ordered the construction of Hindu temples allover his empire to convert the populace.

    334 BC(E) ~ The macedonian rebellion which managed to get some cites was quickly crushed by the overwhelming Persian force and annexed Macedonia to end the threat.

    321 BC(E) ~ The Hindu Mauryan Dynasty was established and managed to unite India for the first time. This lead to increased trade and unity between the two nations for the time being.

    274 ~ 236 BC(E) ~ Asoka became the emperor of the Mauryan Empire of India and converted to Buddhism and asked the Persian King to convert. The King says no in which causes tensions to rise.

    265 ~ 241 BC(E) The first First Punic War happens in which the Greeks see an opportunity to reclaim Greece singed an alliance with Carthage. The Persians seeing the need for an alliance to protect their claims allied with Rome. The Romans take the Island of Sicily the surrounding islands from Carthage. The Romans also take the opportunity to take some of Greece and Crete which in turn angers the Persians and cause a major relations shift. The Persians would never forget or forgive the Romans for that.

    218 ~ 201 BC2nd Punic War After Carthage was defeated in the first Punic War, it recovered and rebuilt its army. When Rome provoked Carthage by encouraging a rebellion in one of its colonies Spain; Carthage struck back. The Carthaginians asked for help from their old enemies and supriseingly agreed. The Persians sent reinforcements to help Hannibal fight Rome. Hannibal was still defeated in the end because of the Romans attacking the African mainland and forcing Hannibal return back to protect Carthage. The Persians themselves could not help because a flu of some sort made a huge chunk of their army to die. Those that weren't sick had to go back to Greece so that it could be protected from the Roman onslaught that they knew would come.

    198 BC(E) ~ The Romans finally attacked and managed to get much land from them. The Persians were not able to send a major amount of men to help perforce because they were tied down else where. The Persians were forced to sign a treaty with Rome that gave up all of western Greece along with the Peloponnesian.

    To be contiuned...

    Just to note... If more info on the rest of the world I did not cover was left out could someone provide a link of somesort.
     
  4. das

    das Regeneration In Process

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2001
    Messages:
    19,309
    Location:
    Ekaterinburg (Sverdlovsk), Russia
    Why Marathon again, especially if in OTL the Persians passed it by without any problems? Or were you reffering to the Battle of Salamis, which was the vital defeat of that invasion?

    Also, the Egyptian revolt was subdued by Xerxes in 484 BC. I'm not sure if they could manage another rebellion so soon.

    Persian Hinduism? I really doubt that could work (analogies with Constantine are inappropriate - Christianity was widespread in the Roman Empire, Hinduism was scarcely even known by the Persian rulers). A religion based on historical pre-Zoroastrian Persian polytheism would work much better for many reasons, and it would be fairly similar in many regards, though not quite the same. Alternatively you'll need a double-PoD, to create a viable Hindu community in Persia by the time this happens.

    Although, here is what might be much more fun (as well as feasible) - a closer analogy with Constantine, i.e. Xerxes converting to a certain monotheist faith well-known to the Persian rulers (the stance of which towards conversion, I comment to forestall such objections, not being strictly established yet - and I'm sure that they'll make an exception for their supreme ruler and descendant of their saviour, as well as for his people if he demands it). That would be a very different timeline, ofcourse, but it certainly is worth further development. Both the cultural and political implications of a Judaist Persia triumphant over the Eastern Mediterranean are mindboggling.

    But I digress.

    Would that still happen? Alexander did knock out much of the Mauryan competition for them.

    Um, what Greeks exactly? The Greek cities in Europe (tributaries to Persia, presumably)? The Greek colonial states? The Greek diaspora (btw, that too is very interesting - the Greek refugees would greatly boost colonial populations, and would probably establish new colonies as well, especially in Iberia and Gaul; though their alliance with Carthage would imply that some of them might've settled within the Carthaginian empire - or maybe, given a suitably strong threat as in this timeline, the Greek colonies might've accepted Carthaginian protection, resulting in a trully epic-sized Carthaginian colonial empire)?

    All in all, a fine "first" try, but needs some refining, and more detail in the "missing years". One would suppose, for instance, that there might be some more troubles in Persia - if only because of the new religion. Also, its a bit too straightforward for my tastes - there is really much, much more you could do with the world coming from your double-PoD, even without any butterfly effects whatsoever. I had already mentioned the possibilities in Carthage and India, for instance. A Greek diaspora is also likely to speed up the state-formation in Gaul. A more strongly-religious Persia - no matter what religion it picks up - will likely influence various barbaric tribes around it. The Punic Wars going so OTL-ishly in spite of drastically altered balance of power in the Mediterranean also cause severe flinching.

    Still, this is promising.
     
  5. Cannae

    Cannae Philosophy of Poverty

    Joined:
    May 20, 2006
    Messages:
    2,241
    Location:
    Johto
    First off I thank you for giving me constructive criticism as I am not so sure on everything and had to rely on a timeline that gave me only certin events so thanks.

    Ok I wasn't origanaly refering to the battle of Salamis but after lokking I may want to change that.



    Oh well acording to the sorce I had it had no mention of this so I will look into this more and change this.

    Good ponit I should of thought of that. However my plan was to be later in the story that a civil war would occur becuase of the fact that the eastern
    half of the empire (the border between the two places would be somewhere near Irans current border) would have been converted to Hinduism. The otherside I was thinking could be converted to a monothiestic relgion.(the best canidate being Judaism IMHO)

    Well I was thinking about making Xerxes a covert to Judiasm but I changed my mind for some reason. I now though I have rethought about it and feel it would make more secnce.

    But I digress.

    Well I thought I said that his Father and Alex himself both got killed by the Persia during the uprising of Maceadiona

    If I understand you correctly I was refering to various upriseings of the city states in Europe. The Perisan Roman Allance was basicly the premise of the enemy of my enemy is my friend. I do however like the idea that the Greeks having a mass dispora to settle within and establish more clonies within Spain and France areas.

    Yes I admit it's not perfict but it is still a rough draft and not the final version. It needs IMHO more revsion. So thanks for all of the advice.
     
  6. North King

    North King blech

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2004
    Messages:
    18,145
    Not true. Alexander barely even grazed the Nanda Dynasty, arguably the largest power in India until the Mauryas overthrew them. Alex, in fact, did very little: he marched to the borders of India, smashed a single army, and left, conveniently avoiding battling hundreds of thousands of Indian soldiers, and thousands of war elephants. Strange, the way that works out...
     
  7. Thlayli

    Thlayli Le Pétit Prince

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2005
    Messages:
    10,565
    Location:
    In the desert
    Well, to me it seemed like he marched down the Indus, smashing several armies, and would have liked to continue, if a mutiny among his soldiers didn't force him to withdraw back into Persia.
     
  8. silver 2039

    silver 2039 Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2003
    Messages:
    16,208
    The mutiny occured because the battle he "won" was so bloody he would have been unable to continue regardless. He fought nothing more than the the Indus kingdoms. If he had ever faced the Maghda in battle he would have been annihalated, they posessed an army of 100,000 men, and thousands of war elephants.
     
  9. North King

    North King blech

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2004
    Messages:
    18,145
    Silver is correct. Comparing the armies of the Indus to all of India is like comparing Argos to all of Greece. The Nanda Dynasty was one of the most powerful in the world at this time; yes, Alexander had defeated the Persians before, but the Indians would have been a completely different war.
     
  10. das

    das Regeneration In Process

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2001
    Messages:
    19,309
    Location:
    Ekaterinburg (Sverdlovsk), Russia
    "Persianism" or Judaism would've split it just as well, if need be.

    Meaning all of the European ones?

    About the Nanda - fair enough, but the invasion seems to have inspired Chanakya to plot against the Nanda in the first place, so my point still stands, kind of.
     
  11. North King

    North King blech

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2004
    Messages:
    18,145
    From everything I've read, Alexander's Invasion had an uncertain impact on India at best, and probably didn't quite have the impact on the future conquerors that legend would have. Furthermore, the Nandas were corrupt enough that Chandragupta et al. would probably still overthrow them, given the chance.
     
  12. silver 2039

    silver 2039 Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2003
    Messages:
    16,208
    Alexander's impact was restricted largerly to the Indus.
     
  13. Thlayli

    Thlayli Le Pétit Prince

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2005
    Messages:
    10,565
    Location:
    In the desert
    Still, I wouldn't underestimate his ability to deal with forces that vastly outnumber him, as shown time and time again with Persia. If he had even 10,000 more soldiers, or perhaps a Persian auxiliary, he might have swept through the Gangetic plain, using the inherent factionalism of the post-Maurya period to his advantage.

    Hmm, Alexandrine India. That would be a good althist... ;)
     
  14. North King

    North King blech

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2004
    Messages:
    18,145
    The Persian forces were incredibly disunited, because they came from such a large area. The Nandas would have a vastly superior morale than Persians ever did (their forces coming from a far more concentrated area, and their elephants would be far more effective after that first battle, as the first one was fought during the monsoon; any further campaigns would have to deal with elephants on home turf in normal campaigning season. Also, I have no idea why you would even reference post-Mauryan India, as this was pre-Maurya, and India was still actually moderately unified under the Nandas.

    The war between Seleucus Nicator and Chandragupta, though fought by different commanders, should give a good indication: Indian armies were not inherently inferior to Greeks. While the Nandas would have had an inferior general to Chandragupta, they still would have been able to bloody the Greeks so severely that any notion of conquest would have to be abandoned; the best Alexander invading India could hope for was some loot and securing his Indus territories better. And even this assumes that Chandragupta never reunites the Indians and drives the Greek armies out...
     
  15. Israelite9191

    Israelite9191 You should be reading

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Messages:
    4,199
    Location:
    Annapolis, Maryland
    Judaism would never work as a Persian religion. The Zoroastrian dualist theology was inherently incompatible with early Judaism, and in many ways even later Judaism. Additionally, though Judaism has over the millenia gained many converts including smaller nations, the ability of Judaism to convert peoples on the scale of western Persia simply does not exist, especially given the history of Mesopotamian-Jewish relations. A much more likely occurence would be for a Persian religion based on Judaism to develop, similar to the prophetic Iranic religions of Manichaeism and Mandaeanism. One possible way for this to occur would be for a cleric of the proto-Yazdanist religion, already semi-monotheistic and Iranic dualist, to integrate Jewish teachings and become the founder of a more mainstream and monotheistic Judaeo-Iranic religion.
     
  16. Cannae

    Cannae Philosophy of Poverty

    Joined:
    May 20, 2006
    Messages:
    2,241
    Location:
    Johto
    I may be wrong and need to look this up but I would have thought that Persia and the Israelites had good relations due to the fact Persia let them return from exile and go back where they were before the Babylonians moved them. I could be wrong though so I am going to double check about that.
     
  17. LittleBoots

    LittleBoots The Bloody Banner

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    Messages:
    1,979
    Booo whore, Greeks don't lose to pansy Persians! Althistories are only good when they result in massive Greek victories or resurgent Byzantine-area Greek empires!

    [/wanders off mumbling and ranting about something called "Hellas Megas" and "Eleutheria"]
     
  18. Israelite9191

    Israelite9191 You should be reading

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Messages:
    4,199
    Location:
    Annapolis, Maryland
    There was good relations between the Persians (not necessarily the Mesopotamians ruled by the Persians) and the Jews, but that does not mean they were ready and eager to convert. The Persians were a very proud people and not eager to simply abandon their own beliefs and adopt another. It was hard enough to convert to Islam, even after being conquered in massive holy war, much less to Judaism which demands the redefinition of cultural identity by its converts. Many Arabs, Berbers, Turks, and others were open to this, but the Persians would never have been, especially as they had just acted as patriarchal saviors to the Jews, placing themselves in an even more arogant psychology. However, it is fully possible that some sort of prophetic figure could absorb a measure of Jewish theology which was then superimposed on an Iranic body, allowing for a native monotheism.
     
  19. das

    das Regeneration In Process

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2001
    Messages:
    19,309
    Location:
    Ekaterinburg (Sverdlovsk), Russia
    Nor would it work as a Roman one, but a certain heretical variation did. ;) How hard is it for a sufficiently shell-shocked Xerxes to develop a Persia-compatible version of Judaism? Hell, it was already in development - Persian influence on Judaism was (to my mind, disgustingly) great, including the appearence of an actual dualism in Judaism, as well as the development of angelology. So perhaps given some more time and/or some master theologician, it is entirely possible to create a Persian Judauism, though ofcourse it would be greatly changed by this. As for converting people, how hard could it be once you get working on it? If the Judaistic Persian kings remain in power for long enough their faith will spread soon enough. Compare with Shi'ite Islam in OTL Persia (went from the ideology of a small ruling elite to mass religion in less than a century). Compare with Christianity in Rome, only take away all persecutions and instead put all the power of the state in its favour. Judaism in Khazaria is a less succesful example, but an example nonetheless and its failure was less the fault of Judaism as a religion and more of Khazaria's conflicting social tendencies. Persia is much better off in that regard, its population is fairly concentrated and well-organised, and the cities - where an organised monotheist religion is more likely to catch on - are many and important. This helped Alexander conquer it in OTL - in longer time but more securely, it might allow Judaism to do the same here.

    I am not saying it is assured, but I am saying that it could work out just fine.

    Mind you, a native Persian Abrahamic monotheism would also be quite neat.

    Funny you should mention Mesopotamia, where I recall in pre-Persian times there existed a (admittedly-small) native Judaistic state. Its name escapes at the moment, though. Still, its a precedent.
     
  20. Israelite9191

    Israelite9191 You should be reading

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Messages:
    4,199
    Location:
    Annapolis, Maryland
    Perhaps the most important reason that that happened was that Christianity seperated itself from Judaism. If the early Church had not reached the decision that Gentiles could be Christian without being Jewish, Christianity would never have risen to dominate the Roman Empire.
    Both of those factors, dualism and angelology, are highly overestimated as factors of the Jewish religion. They were important, but Judaism has never become a truly dualistic religion in the way that Zoroastrianism and, to a lesser degree, Christianity and Islam have. Nor are angels nearly as important in Judaism as they are in Zoroastrianism, Christianity, and Islam. They form an interesting facet of Judaism and are important in Kabalah, but that is about it.
    I am saying it is fully possible for a Iranic form of Judaism to form, it would just have to form into a seperate religion for it to gain any ground beyond a small cult following. Like, say, Christianity.
    A lot harder than you believe.
    Islam is a very different situation. The rise of Islam in Persia involved the Persian nation falling tremendously from power and being conquered by a completely foreign nation. The whole psychology of the Persian people at the time was 180 degrees different from that of Xerxes. Where as Islam was spread among a people who had just suffered one of the greatest falls in human history and thus a people who have lost complete faith in themselves and their traditions. Meanwhile, the conversion of Xerxes-era Persia to an external faith simply makes no sense. They are a people at the height of national egotism. Following something along the lines of the proposed TL it is possible that Xerxes could recieve some sort of vision from G-d (ie the Jewish/Abrahamic G-d) that he interprets as giving him victory and then goes on to construct a Judaeo-Iranic religion. However, for it to go anywhere in converting the Persian people, it would have to fall in line with Iranic theology and, at the same time, appeal to the egotisms rather than asking them, as Judaism does, to redefine themselves as members of a completely different people.
    As I pointed out, conversion of the Roman Empire to Christianity would never have been succesful if Christianity remained a Jewish cult rather than defining itself as something entirely new.
    Khazaria is a completely different situation in terms of national psychology.
    These are all pluses, you're right, and would certainly benefit the rise of an Judaeo-Iranic monotheism. However, national psychology/egotism negate the possibility of Persia not only converting to a new religion, but converting to one not of Iranic origin, and much worse converting to one that demands redefinition of national identity of its converts.
    For all the previous reasons I have layed out, no, it could not work out.
    And much more plausible.
    Not really. I am not entirely aware of this particular state you speak of, but its existence does not matter. What does matter is that the Babylonians and Assyrians both looked down and oppressed the Jews. Jews were never fond of the Mesopotamians (Babylon even today in Jewish liturgy serves as a symbol of demonic oppression) and the Mesopotamians returned the favor.
     

Share This Page