seems like my thread got shot down...
Sigh. Dach, you're absolutely right, but why do you have to ruin our fun? Are you that much of a killjoy? The question's not whether Hannibal could have taken Rome - he couldn't, as you and I well know - but what would happen if by some ungodly miracle he did.
Dachs. I'm not a roof, but a bloody badger.
And, well, okay. I just got really hyperexcited about a classical alternate history when it appears, as opposed to the Hitler stuff that always gets tossed around. It's always nice to see something around my area of expertise.
As to 'shooting stuff down'...well, see later in the post.
Sharwood said:
I think this was discussed in another thread back when I first joined, along the lines of "What if Carthage won the 2nd Punic War?" We all pretty much decided the result would be a Carthaginian Civil War, as the Carthaginian leadership - excepting, of course, the Barcas themselves - would almost certainly have tried to kill Hannibal, fearing his power. If they succeeded, they might just have won. If they lost, Hannibal would annihilate them. Either way, the distraction enables Italy to throw off the Africans, and you probably end up with some sort of Greek city-state style coalition there. What happens after that is anyone's guess.
So, assuming Rome is somehow burned down, and Qarthadast has the aforementioned civil war (I pretty much agree; considering Hannibal's enemies in the Qarthadastim senate, it's almost inconceivable that they would simply let him Caesar himself into a position of supreme power...they had to be pushed into doing something like that after they lost a war, but having not done that they will fight like hell...so yeah, damaging civil war in the Safot Softim biQarthadast, with uncertain outcome - probably Barcid, Hannibal's family had Iberia after all), this is how I see the ancient Mediterranean in the coming decades.
I actually kind of like the idea of a Megale Hellenic coalition, as well as a Campanian one dominated by Capua, which was after all a bloody important state in Italia and one with significant ties to Qarthadast. Maybe they can form federal Leagues, like those of the Achaians and Aitolians, which had a pretty cool political structure. The Capuans and the Tarantines have got enough diplomatic pull with the Africans that they can reasonably expect to get accepted as allies, dominating their respective Leagues, with a relationship somewhat similar to that Rome had with its own alae. Neither of those really can outpower the other, so they and the Samnites will probably fight depressingly inconclusive wars, but be too powerful for a state like Qarthadast to muscle in on anyway. (Considering the beating that the Semites took from piddly-ass Syrakousai, I'm not too convinced on their ability to fight too well...mercantile states usually aren't the tops at land warfare, when they hire mercs to do most of the fighting especially.)
The impact on Greece will be interesting. Makedon under Philippos V is actually not doing too badly, and without even the token Roman aid to the coalition of states opposing him he can probably pull out an advantageous outcome to the First Makedonian War. As in, eradicating the Roman hold on coastal Illyria, which would be a huge plus, geopolitically and economically. Plus, the protector of the Achaians is gone. Instead of turning against Attalos, Rhodos, and the Chians, he may try to press his advantage in Greece proper, reestablishing the same kind of dominance that Makedon held under Philippos II and Alexandros. (This may be pie in the sky but I don't care.) So, long-term favorable to Makedon with extra inroads into Greece and perhaps southern Italy via the Illyrians.
Arche Seleukeia is about to GA, and big time. Megas Antiochos, one of the greatest rulers in world history, has got Panion and the Areios ahead of him, and barring ridiculous butterflies I can't see him doing any worse than he had in OTL. And no Magnesia (though also no intervention in Greece proper, which is probably a Good Thing as well)...well, that'll make the AS the most powerful state in the Mediterranean and Middle East, easily outperforming the Qarthadastim. I can definitely see them combining to wipe out the irksome Attalids in Pergamon, though after that a proxy war struggle with Makedonia will probably arise. Arche Seleukeia will be taking the role that Ptolemaic Egypt held in the Aigion before it starts sucking after Raphia. Without the defeat at Magnesia, AS has a fantastic chance of turning that position over the Pahlavan into a winner, perhaps using them as foederati. Depends a bit on chance, but I think that'll be enough to push them over the edge. Not sure about the effect on Baktria, but then again Baktria kind of defies the laws of history all the time.
Gauls will probably reclaim the territory in northern Italia that the Romans were just then colonizing (e.g. Placentia). Massilia, losing its connection to the Romans, will probably undergo some brief troubles but may come out ahead in the long run, carve out some of Transalpine Gaul for itself in a miniempire. The Etruscans...probably another federal state, maybe a reversion to the old Rasna leagues, though considering the Campanian example that may be unlikely.
So yeah...power vacuum in Italy will probably be manipulated for the gain of the Makedonians and the Qarthadastim, with none of the major powers coming out ahead in the near future. While the Arche Seleukeia is probably the biggest winner.
Oh, naked plug, but I'm writing an alternate history in the current NES AH thread (IV), which is around this time period...the first installment, posted about an hour ago, is mostly background and has to deal with the early wars of the Diadochi (and may be later developed by me into an article on the time period, it's sadly understudied...most people skip from the death of Alexandros to the rise of Rome
), with the PoD at the very end, regarding Eumenes of Kardia's decision to not engage in the Battle of Gabiene in early 316 BC(E). Hopefully will turn this into something longer and solid in the coming weeks.
