The Persian Alexander

August 7 642-Rome, Italy

Khosaru the Great, now an old man, was sitting on a temporary throne outside, waiting for his new royal residence to be completed, when two soldiers suddenly rushed up to him, dragging a old man who appeared to be a monk before him. The soldiers announced "We found he who you are searching for in a Monastarey, your highness". Khosaru was skeptical of the soldiers, as there had been many other claims like this over the past few weeks. Khosaru then said "Prove to your King of Kings that this is indeed the one who i seek". The soldiers then pulled off the old man's hood, to reveal a terrified old man[1]. When Khosaru's saw the man's face, he immediatly recognized him. Khosaru announced to the man "You know what crime you commited, and you will pay the ultimate price for it". The old man bowed his head, and cried a little, as Khosaru drew his sword. With a single slash, the Old man's head came off. Khosaru then exclaimed "Maurice's death has been avenged!". Seconds later, Khosaru collapsed[2] and fell to the ground. Guards began rushing towards him, but it was too late, the greatest King of Kings was dead.

His life story would be passed down for Generations. Now it is your turn to hear it.



The Persian Empire and Vassals upon Khorashu the Great's death
Persian Empire in Yellow
Vassal States in Orange (Vassals are as follows Left to Right:The Avar Khaganate, The Lakhamid Kingdom, the Gokturk Khanganate, and Small Persian-Indian Raj's

[1]-Phocas, the last Roman Emperor who overthrew Maurice
[2]-Modern writers believe Khorashu suffered a Heart attack

Perso-wank!

Still, maybe it won't last much beyond Khosrau's death.

Perso-wank!

Still, maybe it won't last much beyond Khosrau's death.

Click to expand...

After I first explain how this map came into being (the life of Khosaru II), I have some very interesting things that will happen.

Well, you made reality to the dreams of the Sassanid Persian-wankers.

As a Persian studies minor, I would just like to say I DEMAND that this be continued!

Well, you made reality to the dreams of the Sassanid Persian-wankers.

Click to expand...

Wank's can and will in this case be realistic though.

Alexander the Great's conquets is a good example of Macedonian Wank and its realistic since it happened.

As a Persian studies minor, I would just like to say I DEMAND that this be continued!

Click to expand...

It will continue, although the Timeline will start from the POD in 642, and bring us up to date with the first little story. Then we will see what Khosaru's hiers will do with this new empire.

________________________________________________________________

Does anyone want to take a guess at the POD? (Hint its in 602)

How come Khusro decides to revive the Lakhmid kingdom?

Also, how far to the fore has his mental instability come ITTL?

How did Constantinople fall?

Wasn't Cyrus more of a Persian analogue to Alexander? And a better one at that.

It's interesting.

Earl_of_Somerset said:

It will continue, although the Timeline will start from the POD in 642, and bring us up to date with the first little story. Then we will see what Khosaru's hiers will do with this new empire.

________________________________________________________________

Does anyone want to take a guess at the POD? (Hint its in 602)

Click to expand...

I can't realistically see this state holding together very long, it has natural potential to fragment into a Mediterranean, Christian half, and an Iranian plateau, Zoroastrian half. Still, the way in which this (in my view inevitable) breakup happens should be very interesting.

POD guess- Maurice escapes to Khusro's court?

Totally subscribed!

I know damn near nothing about the Sassanids, and this would be an awesome story for sure to see the Persians defeat the Roman Empire once and for all!

Subscribed, but one funny thing is that today, when i finally updated my Roman TL, i described Khorasu escaping from Persia to seek the help of the Romans... Well, in truth it was as OTL, even if in a different historical context and aided by a my OC. Naturally i'm not making advertising of my TL... ...Whatever.

However, IMO that Persian wank didn't butterfly Islam (Arabia is coloured as a vassal, so...), but surely the fall of ERE opened the way to Italy. And if the Wank crashed after Khorasu's death...

There will be commistions between Christianity and Zoroastrainism?

The POD is actually that the Lakhamid King allows his daughter to be wed to Khosaru like he wanted. IOTL, the Lakhamid king refused, and the Lakhamid kingdom went to war with persian and eventually got absorbed, after both sides lose alot of lives. This time those soldiers dont die and the Lakhamids are able to help the Persians.

This still allows for Phocas to take over (and the war begins as OTL).
The butterflies kill Heraclius attempt at taking over, and as a result the Eastern Roman Empire and Exarchates go under.

I have several problems with this.

1. Persia was already having severe over-stretching problems by this point. Khosrau was running out of money, men, and the provincial landlords were gaining power.

2. This somehow assumes that the Persians will somehow be able to subjugate both the Avars and Slavs moving into the Balkans.

3. Khosrau would have faced major revolts from both his Anatolian and Egyptian, as well as Levantine, conquests.

4. I'm not even going to begin to comprehend how he managed to vassalize everything from Austria and the Ukraine.

5. Khosrau's vassalization of the Chinese sphere in Central Asia would have provoked a Chinese response. a battle of Talas analogue is likely.

6. Persia, even if it could have taken Constantinople, would have collapsed if trying to push itself to take the Exarchates. Especially Italy, of all places.

In the end I think this is quite a bit much and is vastly overestimating the capabilities of Khosrau. Khosrau was a smart man but he could not do all of this.

1. Persia was already having severe over-stretching problems by this point. Khosrau was running out of money, men, and the provincial landlords were gaining power.

2. This somehow assumes that the Persians will somehow be able to subjugate both the Avars and Slavs moving into the Balkans.

3. Khosrau would have faced major revolts from both his Anatolian and Egyptian, as well as Levantine, conquests.

4. I'm not even going to begin to comprehend how he managed to vassalize everything from Austria and the Ukraine.

5. Khosrau's vassalization of the Chinese sphere in Central Asia would have provoked a Chinese response. a battle of Talas analogue is likely.

6. Persia, even if it could have taken Constantinople, would have collapsed if trying to push itself to take the Exarchates. Especially Italy, of all places.

Click to expand...

1.He will have more men because not only do they not fight the lakhamids, face a weaker roman leadership, but they have the entire Lakhamid kingdom supporting them, and a few new friends

2.I have a plan for the Balkans

3.If they could hold them IOTL they can ITTL. (there will be certain things that will happen to lessen the chance of revolt)

4.Avar Khaganate

5.There may be something like that.

6.Exarchate of Africa only needs a land campaign from Egypt, and Italy will take awhile, but the Persians will have help.

Earl_of_Somerset said:

1.He will have more men because not only do they not fight the lakhamids, face a weaker roman leadership, but they have the entire Lakhamid kingdom supporting them, and a few new friends

2.I have a plan for the Balkans

3.If they could hold them IOTL they can ITTL. (there will be certain things that will happen to lessen the chance of revolt)

4.Avar Khaganate

5.There may be something like that.

6.Exarchate of Africa only needs a land campaign from Egypt, and Italy will take awhile, but the Persians will have help.

Click to expand...

1. More men does not stop over-stretching. More men means he will have more people to pay and will have to drain his coffers even more. And I doubt the Lakhmids could contribute more than a marginal number of men to the campaign.

2. I await your plan but still raise concerns over him being able to conquer the area. More likely is a consolidation and abandonment of outer Balkan areas.

3. They held them in OTL for a very short amount of time, not until 642.

4. The raises a whole plethora of problems including the fact that the Avars were never that massive, even in their prime, let alone as a vassal.

5. But this is a problem because it further increases Persian over-stretching.

6. We're not talking geographic terms here, we're talking military and economic realities. Khosrau was running out of money and for him to take all of that would have destroyed most of Persia's army and money.

The Empire is gonna be very weakly held together, but Khosaru has a solution for money ITTL. I do not wish to spoil the Balkans idea, but it will indeed allow for persian control of all the Balkans.

also do you have a map of the Avar Khangate i couldn't find a good one.

Alexander the Great was fairly overstretched and the second he died it splintered, dont expect this to be much different

On Alexander, Persia is not Macedon. They are attempting to conquer much vaster lands than Alexander after already being low on resources. They will have to fight their way past the exarchates, Italy, the Central Asian oases and Chinese, the Indus nations, and somehow not implode, even before Khosrau dies.

It take two months to travel from Armenia to Ctesiphon on sassanid roads. This would be a nightmare for Khosrau.

On Alexander, Persia is not Macedon. They are attempting to conquer much vaster lands than Alexander after already being low on resources. They will have to fight their way past the exarchates, Italy, the Central Asian oases and Chinese, the Indus nations, and somehow not implode, even before Khosrau dies.

It take two months to travel from Armenia to Ctesiphon on sassanid roads. This would be a nightmare for Khosrau.

Click to expand...

If you give this Timeline time, there will be a solution (plus conquered lands have Roman roads).

Not all Vassalization requires battles.

And unlike Alexander in Persia, who captured huge amounts of gold and silver, Khosaru is not going to receive much in that regard from most of his conquests.

He would be lucky to break even, and that's not good for continuing to push onward.

This is the sort of thing that needs to be addressed to begin with.

And vassalization does require imposing Persian authority - which costs men, money, and requires some way to keep the newly vassalized from deciding to declare independence when his back is turned.

Khosaru II is gonna get his hands on more money, you need to wait and see how exactly

Also on a side note, keep in mind alot of Romans hated Phocas because he was a tyrannical leader. Some romans would defect i bet, especially if this Khosaru is more tolerate to Christians (POD involves him getting another Christian Wife)