173 CE - I’ve been doing a project for a while now on What if Rome Never Rose? And I’ve kinda developed a scenario out where a Parthian-Ptolemaic rivalry develops. However now I’m at a pivotal point where a foreign conqueror from Arabia known as Idil ‘The Conqueror’ has now rose to change Arabia and the Middle East forever. I will be posting more on this scenario soon but I’m open to feedback and ideas and I’m happy for anyone to help me further develop the scenario.
What if Rome Never Rose?
- Thread starter morsta99
- Start date
173 CE - I’ve been doing a project for a while now on What if Rome Never Rose? And I’ve kinda developed a scenario out where a Parthian-Ptolemaic rivalry develops. However now I’m at a pivotal point where a foreign conqueror from Arabia known as Idil ‘The Conqueror’ has now rose to change Arabia and the Middle East forever. I will be posting more on this scenario soon but I’m open to feedback and ideas and I’m happy for anyone to help me further develop the scenario.
A world without Rome is probably ultimately replaced by a Carthginian dominated Med, or, if sufficient butterflies start flapping, the power that conquered half the world in Roman infancy, the Empire of Alexander and/or one of its potential successors such as Ptolomaic Egypt, might be diverted to Westward expansion
Carthaginian-dominated Western Med, perhaps. Though who knows? Maybe one of the Celtic tribes of Gaul develop their own empire.
Lots of butterfly happens but here's some major ones:
The med is dominated by a Mix of Carthage centered in North Africa, Iberian peninsula and Southern Italy, Celtics Empires in Gaul and Brittania that eventually come into fights against the Germans living in the other side of the Rhine river as well as the Latins in the rest of the Italian Peninsula. The Greek world keeps going strong even if divided and expanding through the Balkans and coasts of Anatolia, they will have to both deal with the eventual Slavic and Germanics invaders as well as Dacians and other peoples in the region, that's up in the air how it goes.
In the Middle East I think is more likely that Persia ends up dominating Egypt again, at least in the long run alongside control of the Levant and much of Anatolia alongside Caucasus, without a Rome to oppose them, Persia will be the biggest boy in the region that will be calling the shots and there wouldn't be anyone strong enough to challenge them. But even in a scenario where they keep in a cold war with Egypt of sorts, I don't think it's likely that the Arabs will be able to conquer their empire like OTL because one of the key reasons was the brutal last Roman-Sassanid Wars that wrecked both states in every sense of the word as well as the following Civil War that further fucked up Persia, without either of those there as well as the fact they control more territory and thus more population, they will probably be able to fight off the Arab invaders and keep them contained in the peninsula at least.
What's the PoD here? A common PoD is Rome getting further trashed in the Gaulish sack.
I've heard some arguments that without Rome to interfere, one of the Diadochi states would manage to reunify the others. Either the Seleucids or Macedonia. Ptolomies only lasted as long as they did because Rome would pull their bacon out of the fire to prevent the Seleucids from conquering Egypt.
A problem for Macedonia/Greece centered powers, is that they're about to get rekt by a ceilt invasion.
No Rome might lead to Greek/Epirote dominance over the "boot".
I've heard some arguments that without Rome to interfere, one of the Diadochi states would manage to reunify the others. Either the Seleucids or Macedonia. Ptolomies only lasted as long as they did because Rome would pull their bacon out of the fire to prevent the Seleucids from conquering Egypt.
A problem for Macedonia/Greece centered powers, is that they're about to get rekt by a ceilt invasion.
No Rome might lead to Greek/Epirote dominance over the "boot".
World would become quickly unrecognsible. Carthage would dominant Western Mediterranean. Depending about POD Italy would be either controlled by Etruscan and Greek city states or then by Celt tribes and Greek city states. There could be too Roman Republic as Carthagian puppet if Rome loses either Firts or Second Punic War.
Ptolemaic Egypt would last longer. Things on Eastern Mediterranean would take very different route.
Ptolemaic Egypt would last longer. Things on Eastern Mediterranean would take very different route.
If the Romans never showed up then I think the Seleucids would be the dominant power in the Near East. It is quite possible that they would eventually succeed in conquering Ptolemaic Egypt and with the resources of Egypt they could press their control over much of Anatolia and even into Europe. The OTL fall of the Seleucids to the Parthians only occurred after the Seleucids had been crippled in wars with Rome. This stronger ATL Seleucid Empire could last for centuries and be regarded as the one true successor of Alexander's Empire, dominating the Greek world.
Without the Romans the whole ethno-linguistic map of Europe would be radically different.
Without the Romans the whole ethno-linguistic map of Europe would be radically different.
Very true. I would suppose that Southern Italy would be mix of Greek and Italic speakers. Sardinia and Corsica might are able to keep their non-Indo-European languages so probably Basque wouldn't be only isolate language of Europe. Iberia would be mix of Phoinician speakers (mainly OTL Andalusia), Basque speakers (OTL Navarre and northern coast of Spain) and rest of Iberia would be dominated by Celts. Celtic languages would too dominate Western Europe and Britain. Germanic languages probably have about same areas as in OTL expect Britain. Balkans is really intresing. Perhaps it remain with Greeks, Illyrians and Dacians.
I’m mostly thinking the point of divergence being that the last king of Rome: Lucius Tarquinius Superbus is deposed more violently than in our timeline with the republic quickly failing. The city of Rome exists mind you aswell as it being independent for some time however I’m thinking that early Etruscan and Samnite incursions cause it to be annexed and the city of Rome reduced significantly.
I have been thinking about the roles of Macedon and Epirus in this but I’m mainly thinking that they will have wars with eachother aswell as dealing with threats such as Thrace more than anything. I’ve not actually got round to Greece yet.
IIRC it was OTL only romans that stopped the Seleucids in conquering Egypt - and even after they have already suffered a devastating loss to Rome earlier. Without Roman intervention I think they would rather sooner than later take Egypt and become the dominant power of the East.
Rome's greatest advetage was its seemingly unlimited manpower. The battles and armies Rome lost to Hannibal or to Pyrrhus would have crippled any of the hellenistic monarchies and Rome simply shrugged them off and continued fighting. This was in big part a result of roman policy towards citizenship - meaning that when romans sent out settler to found a new colonia the settler did not stop being romans and become citizens of the new settlement. Than there was the tendency later adopted to grant citizenship to allied cities.
If Caesar is to be believed then the Gauls around his time had already more or less capitulated to the Germanics coming over from across the Rhine. And without the Romans you don't even have to wait to 50 BC, 100 BC saw the first great barbarian invasion from far north that needed all of Romes power to stop. Instead of losing just north of the Alps they'd march through and pillage the Latin and Greek city states that would have existed without Rome succeeding, and that would repeat itself periodically until one of those warlords decides he wants to be king instead. Brennus and his warband showed centuries ago that even Greece and Anatolia aren't safe.
I’m not overly too sure the Etruscans might even have the capabilities to unify Italy under a solidified banner - of course, they’ll definitely exist but I can see them just creating protectorates in central and northern italy. Notably the linguistic differences in Italy will be huge.
Definitely, today I’ll probably be doing language and religion in 173 CE as well as continuing to show Idil’s conquests by the year 180 CE, expect a description on the torching of Mecca and the Siege of Petra.
Today’s lore outlining and Maps
- Idil’s conquest by 180 CE
- Torching of Mecca and Siege of Petra
- Ethno/linguistic/Religious maps of 173 CE
- Further explanations on the Ptolemaic kingdom and how it came to annex Israel and the status of the Sarates
- Jesus Christ in this timeline (Yeshua of Nazarat)
House of Nazarat is mostly finished however I have not many ideas on what Yeshua did during his life as the Great Architect of Israel.
I should probably show this map too about what has happened in this TL in the 120s and 130s CE.
- Torching of Mecca and Siege of Petra
- Ethno/linguistic/Religious maps of 173 CE
- Further explanations on the Ptolemaic kingdom and how it came to annex Israel and the status of the Sarates
- Jesus Christ in this timeline (Yeshua of Nazarat)
House of Nazarat is mostly finished however I have not many ideas on what Yeshua did during his life as the Great Architect of Israel.
I should probably show this map too about what has happened in this TL in the 120s and 130s CE.
Attachments
during monarchical and republican periods the peninsula was often the theater of conflicts between mountaineer osco-sabellian tribes migrating towards the coastal plains and the local settlers (latins, greek cities, messapians and descendants of previous osco-sabellian migrations), which the latter tended to lose
the phenomenon only rlly stopped iotl after roman conquest, so, unless an alt-rome emerges soon, it'd keep affecting italy for a while, w/ the likely consequence of spreading sabellian languages further
the phenomenon only rlly stopped iotl after roman conquest, so, unless an alt-rome emerges soon, it'd keep affecting italy for a while, w/ the likely consequence of spreading sabellian languages further
Yet with a several 100 years PoD before Caesar, they are still on the upswing, have the best technology and material culture North of the Alps, organized and unified religion while the Germans are primative and even if they get into Gaul they likely Celtcize the same way they Romanized otl.
I suspect the Celts are probably the largest substrates in whatever ends up being called Western Civilization in this tl.
I could see the Germans bounce off the fortified cites of Gaul and then bounce into the Balkans or Italy or not having the tech nor the ease of the unified but increasingly bankrupt, civil war and plague plagued Empire but 5-10 semi unified states they occupy a place similar to the Slavs of otl.
I’ve included him yeah, he’s not the same at all however as he’s the great architect of Israel - one of his children marries the king of Israel and as a reward, he gives his family a title in Nazareth.
Including him in this timeline for a bit of flavour although it may be unrealistic.