What would have happened to the West?
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: General History
Forum Name: General World History
Forum Discription: All aspects of world history, especially topics that span across many regions or periods
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4897
Printed Date: 21-May-2024 at 01:20
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: What would have happened to the West?
Posted By: avesta
Subject: What would have happened to the West?
Date Posted: 08-Aug-2005 at 00:03
|
If the greek resistance during the Achaemenid period had been suppressed, what would have become of the Western world? Would it have become a vassal of eastern kingdoms under Persian rule? Would the romans and britons have ever existed? What would have happened if the battle of Guagamela had gone in favor of the Persians and the greek army was anihilated? |
Replies:
Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 08-Aug-2005 at 00:39
|
Greek culture wouldn't be as relevant and we might well have lost some
philosophical treasures (though actually the best of Greek philosophy
pre-dates Socrates and is badly known, and also Greek influence in
Italy was already very strong) but Rome would have existed and
conquered Italy with even less problems than they had with the
Hellenistic intervention of Pyrrhus. Still, Carthaginians were kind of
allies of Persia and that could have conditioned the Roman expansion
beyond Italy. It's difficult to say because Persians weren't good
sailors nor had any excellent army either. Also, as the empire of
Alexander, that of Persia might have fragmented. My guess: much harder Punic Wars, with better chances for the Carthaginians and the question of how well Persia would have managed to dominate the Eastern Mediterranean against whichever of the western powers would have won the Punic wars. Maybe we would be all now Mazdeists or Mithraists... who knows? ------------- 
NO GOD, NO MASTER! |
Posted By: Menippos
Date Posted: 08-Aug-2005 at 07:06
Which would actually have been quite nice, compared to all these frictions of the early christianity...
------------- CARRY NOTHING |
Posted By: Constantine XI
Date Posted: 10-Aug-2005 at 08:10
|
Although Persia and Carthage had their alliance, it was more borne out
of the difficulties they both faced in dealing with the Greeks at
opposite ends of the Mediterannean. With the Greeks out of the way, the
two civilization would be in direct competition for trade, territory
and tributary states. My theory is that Rome, already having received alot of Greek culture and beginning to assert itself in Italy, would have played the two masterfully to Rome's own benefit. Both sides would have attempted to secure Rome as the valuable ally she undoubtedly was. I personally doubt the Persian system of satrapy was advanced enough to extend much further than the southern Balkans, the Scythians had successfully proved this on land and the Persians were largely reliant on subject states for sea power. In the end Rome may well have had an easier time of subjugating Gaul, Spain and the Balkans while Carthage and Persia slug it out in the Central Mediterannean. Playing the two off against one another until the moment was right, Rome would then swing south and take out one of the two before moving on to the other after finding some pretext. Both Carthage and Persia were vulnerable to Roman intervention, two empires which comprised large subject populations always ripe to rebel. ------------- |
Posted By: Vivek Sharma
Date Posted: 19-Oct-2006 at 08:23
|
Another alexander could have come at a later period & conquered persia.
------------- PATTON NAGAR, Brains win over Brawn |
Posted By: human
Date Posted: 19-Oct-2006 at 08:29
|
What if Alexander wouldnt have died and continued his quest to the west?
------------- You Got to Lose to Know How to Win... |
Posted By: Vivek Sharma
Date Posted: 19-Oct-2006 at 08:49
He could have gone & discovered America. 
------------- PATTON NAGAR, Brains win over Brawn |
Posted By: Gun Powder Ma
Date Posted: 19-Oct-2006 at 09:13
All depends on the Romans and their ability to built a world empire. The Persians had no habit of changing the culture of their subjects, although it was exactly under their reign that Mesopotamia began to lose its identity as a distinct civilisation. But Greek culture was clearly on the rise and the best the Persians could have hoped for was political control, but not cultural impact. That means it would have made hardly a difference. |