Persian Conquests

I thought I would start up a collaborative TL. The POD is 480BC and deals with a thread I posted a while ago about Alexander as a general for the Persians. I figured we could each take turns doing about 100 years a piece and see how far we could take it (I would get the ball rolling with the first installment).

Any takers?
 
Well, not much interest yet :(

I said I would get the ball rolling so I worked out the first part of this venture. If anyone wants to join in just let me know. I eagerly await partners in crime and comments.


480BC: The Battle of Thermopylae ends with the retreat of the Persian army.

The Battle of Salamis is a victory for the Persians when the Greek Alliance falls apart prior to the battle. The Spartan general Eurybiades returns with his contingent to fortify the Peloponnese – the remaining navies of the various city-states attempt to escape the Persian navy by night but are discovered. The ensuing battle, though costly to both sides, ends in a Persian victory.

Though the Alliance all but ceased (and Athens sacked in 479) several cities would continue to fight on until 470BC (chief among these were Sparta, Corinth, and Delphi). Although most of Thessaly, Boeotia, and Attica fall under Persian control by 470 the exhausted armies of Persia are fought to a standstill.

470BC-359BC: The Greek culture of administrative elegance filters into an already well organized and managed Persian Empire – helping to forestall the underlying corruption from too greatly weakening the Empire. This “Golden Age” did however lull the Persian Kings into allowing their client kingdoms and provinces into an every growing self-autonomy.

359BC: Philip II takes control of Macedon when he becomes regent for his nephew Amyntas – later this year Philip proclaims himself King.

Philip’s son Alexander is born.

358BC-340BC: Through a series of campaigns Philip II is able to gain control over most of the Persian administered Greek lands.

340BC: Philip II sets Byzantium under siege – his first overt action against the core of the Persian Empire. Darius III dispatches a small contingent of soldiers and ambassadors calling for Philip’s immediate withdraw and for him to disband his army.

338BC: Philip II establishes the League of Corinth, effectively bringing all of Greece under his control.

337BC-335BC: Philip II battles the Persians for control of Byzantium. Several major naval battles will be fought at this time culminating in the Battle of Corinth where 1200 Persian ships were fought to a draw by 800 League ships.

336BC: An attempt is made on Philip II life. A servant and companion by the name of Pausanias is captured – under torture he implicates Olympias (Philip’s wife – who he never fully liked or trusted). Olympia claims to have been acting in the name of her son but Alexander admits to no knowledge of the assassination attempt. Alexander however is able to convince Philip to banish Olympia instead of beheading her.

335BC: Darius III offers Philip a cease fire. With the Battle for Byzantium drawing more and more soldiers from both sides and the destruction of both armadas at Corinth Philip accepts the cease fire.

334BC: The Treaty of Pella is signed. Philip is granted legitimate rule over the Greek lands under his control – in return for this the Kingdom of Macedonia will be a client state of the Persian Empire. Darius III also demands that Philip offer up his sons as hostages – Philip never fully trusted Alexander after the attempted assassination so begrudgingly accepts this in return for control over several Aegean islands.

Darius III was eager for a peace treaty. During the Macedonian Revolt an underlying danger had become increasingly clear – the satraps needed to be reigned in. This was especially evident in Egypt.

Darius had heard and personally experienced Alexander’s gift as a general – Alexander had successfully defeated several attempts made by Darius and his generals to land and army in Greece and had gone so far as to lead his own invasion of Anatolia in the weeks prior to the cease fire. In Alexander, Darius had both a hostage and a potential commander.

332BC-330BC: Darius III enlists Alexander in putting down several rebellions (Alexander though technically in command of the small army is watched over by several loyal generals).

330BC: Emboldened by Philip’s success, and the apparent preoccupation of Darius with putting out fires all across the Persian Empire, Egypt openly revolts under the leadership of Bagoas (the same man who had been instrumental in bringing Darius to the throne).

Philip II begins campaigning against the Illyrians.

330BC-328BC: Alexander Triumphs over Bagoas. Alexander places one of his generals as the new satrap of Egypt, Ptolemy (a life long friend, body guard, and accomplished general in his own right, who had traveled with Alexander when he became a “hostage”). Though not fully supported by Darius’ ministers and advisers he does legitimately appoint Ptolemy as satrap of Egypt (to appease his advisors and quiet his own misgiving Darius does send nearly a hundred of his own administrators to help Ptolemy).

327BC: Aware of the estrangement between Alexander and Philip and hoping to further gain Alexander as an ally Darius offers the worthwhile commander his daughter Statira’s hand in marriage.

325BC: Philip II campaign in Illyrica faces stiff resistance against the migrating Celtic tribes. Darius III sends Alexander to aide his father in conquering the lands along the upper Danube.

324BC: Philip II dies while fighting the Scordisci (his throat was cut in an apparent night raid – no other soldiers were reported to have been injured).

323BC: Alexander returns to Pella to accept the throne of the Kingdom of Macedonia. Right away he realizes that the succession would not be an easy matter. Amyntas IV, the infant nephew of Philip II who had been in hiding for many years, returns to lay claim as the rightful heir.

322BC-319BC: Macedonian Civil War. Amyntas had spent many years traveling in secret throughout the Kingdom gaining support from other members of the defunct Corinth League who theoretically were equal to Pella. Alexander however had the backing of Darius III and the Persian Empire.

321BC: Darius III dies. His son Darius IV claims the Persian Empire (actually I’m not sure what the name of Darius’ son was – I know he had one but I can’t remember his name). Resentful of the praise his father had lauded on Alexander Darius IV at first restricts the use of Persian warriors and than completely withholds his support in what he states was an internal affair and the need to shift soldiers to the eastern border. Alexander was left with an army of about 7000 to fight with.

319BC: Though Amyntas IV had the superior numbers Alexander’s abilities as a general far out shinned the erstwhile heir. Although the civil war was brought to and end at the Battle of Philippi Alexander would spend the next year putting down the remnants of Amyntas’ coalition.

318BC: Alexander’s son Philip is born.

317BC: Alexander’s daughter Olympia is born.

316BC: With Macedonia well in hand once more Alexander is able to turn his attention on some unfinished business. For the insult of withholding soldiers promised by Darius III Alexander and Statira begin to plot the overthrow of her brother.

315BC: Alexander marches into Byzantium – taking it almost without a fight - and begins his conquest of the Persian Empire (315BC-307BC).

314BC: Darius IV is defeated at the Battle of Issus. Ptolemy Soter of Egypt pledges his support for Alexander (an event that will have repercussions for the two long time friends in years to come).

312BC: Darius IV is defeated again at Nineveh.

311BC: The Battle of Susa – indecisive.

310BC: The siege of Persepolis (which lasts until 308BC).

308BC: Darius IV is captured and imprisoned.

307BC: Alexander defeats the last of Darius IV supporters. Later this year his is proclaimed the new Emperor of the Persian Empire.


The Persian Empire comes through the civil war between Alexander and Darius IV with a new found sense of order. With the purging of the old leadership Alexander is in a position to place loyal generals and administrators in empty satraps. He continues on with the tradition of the Empire to be open and accepting of the various cultures and religions under the Persian banner (though the growing influence of Zoroastrianism will factor heavily into the patchwork of faiths). Though currently at peace the Empire is surrounded by storm clouds that threaten the stability so recently gained.
 
Its pretty good, but a few quibbles. First, Ptolemy wouldnt be appointed satrap because it wouldnt be his place to. Though I could see Ptolemy being left behind to garrison Egypt and later being appointed Satrap by Darius. Also the ntitle of the Persian monarchs was Shahanshah, so Alexander would Shahanshah, not Emperor.

I might be interested in helping with the tl. PM me your ideas for the tl and well discuss.

Once again, good work. :cool:
 
To true, that was rather presumptuous of Alexander. Okay, so let’s say that he left Ptolemy behind to garrison Egypt and upon his return to Persepolis he convinces Darius III of the idea to make Ptolemy a permanent fixture.

Yes, thanks for that correction that was rather sloppy of me. Alexander was proclaimed Shahanshah of the Persian Empire.
 

Leo Caesius

Banned
Actually, in those days, the title was Xšāyaθiya vazarka or Xšāyaθiya xšāyaθiyānām. The title Shahanshah is, I believe, Sassanian (Pahlavi Šāhān šāh) - about six hundred years too late for Alex. :cool:
 
Ugh! :) Okay, Alexander forgoes Persian tradition and goes with the title of Rigas. He is quoted as saying, "To hell with you people, I'm the boss and I like rigas."
 
Tynnin said:
Ugh! :) Okay, Alexander forgoes Persian tradition and goes with the title of Rigas. He is quoted as saying, "To hell with you people, I'm the boss and I like rigas."
Isnt the word Rigas a Greek word derived from Latin? Doesn't seem like the right title for a Persian Emperor at a time when Rome is just another town in Italy.
 
It’s all Greek to me. My colleagues would be the first to agree – linguistics and I never got along.

Okay, so what title do we use? Or is it really going to annoy too many people if we just go with something simple like Emperor?
 

Leo Caesius

Banned
Tynnin said:
It’s all Greek to me. My colleagues would be the first to agree – linguistics and I never got along.

Okay, so what title do we use? Or is it really going to annoy too many people if we just go with something simple like Emperor?
Just call him King of Kings or Great King. That's what all those titles mean, anyway.
 
Ah, I almost forgot – JustinGreen: thanks for the interest, what can I do to convince you to step through the door? I have some 12yr old scotch….some cigars….
 

Leo Caesius

Banned
Thande said:
If I may ask a not too irrelevant question: from whence does 'Padishah' come?
That's another Sassanian title, although it may be earlier. In Old Persian there's a verb, pati-xšaya- which means "to rule over." Pati- is a preposition ("over"). By the Sassanian era, we have a title padixšā(y) which means "ruler," "overlord," that kind of thing. That is the origin of the English word.
 

Thande

Donor
Hmm. I was under the impression that 'Padi-' meant 'all of the-' and so I was going to use 'Padistan' to refer to a unified Central Asian state. I may have to revise that.
 

Leo Caesius

Banned
Thande said:
Hmm. I was under the impression that 'Padi-' meant 'all of the-' and so I was going to use 'Padistan' to refer to a unified Central Asian state. I may have to revise that.
Harwestān would mean "every -stan" or "all the -stans." You should just call it Turān - that's what they called it.
 

Thande

Donor
The state I'm talking about would include Iran, most of Turkey, Kurdistan, OTL Pakistan, and most of the Central Asian 'stan's except Kazhakstan. Assuming the name you gave me is of Persian origin (as I'm assuming it is), would it be acceptable to the Turkic majority in such a state?

Actually, I wonder if Padistan might still be acceptable in the sense of over as 'supranational'...?
 

Leo Caesius

Banned
Thande said:
The state I'm talking about would include Iran, most of Turkey, Kurdistan, OTL Pakistan, and most of the Central Asian 'stan's except Kazhakstan. Assuming the name you gave me is of Persian origin (as I'm assuming it is), would it be acceptable to the Turkic majority in such a state?

Actually, I wonder if Padistan might still be acceptable in the sense of over as 'supranational'...?
The Turanians are considered to be the ancestors of the Turks, and I believe that at least some Turks refer to Greater Turkestan as "Turan," so yes it would be.

The only problem is that Anatolia, Kurdistan, Iran, and Pakistan are most definitely not Turān. These compose the territory of Greater Iran.

Padistan would mean "at the -stans" or "in the -stans" in Pahlavi - not what you're looking for. If you want supranational, you'd use abaršahrīh - a calque on the Latin - abar being cognate with English "over," German "über," Latin "super," and Greek "hyper."
 
Top