Self-explanatory title. Either the Achaemenid Empire never forms or fails to reach the Aegean Sea.
What happens?
Was the disunity of the greek city-states inevitable, or was it a byproduct of persian puppeteering?
What happens to the Lydian Empire? Could it end up becoming a substitute for the achaemenids in Anatolia face the geeks? Or were its kings mostly uninterested in Greece?
What happens to the macedonians?
And what about greek culture? Politics? Colonies?
 

Pellaeon

Banned
This is an interesting what if, the Persian invasions of Greece I think are often thought of(and arguably are) foundational events in the formation of "western" identity.

I don't know much about the Lydians but I think they would remain in contact with Greece.

As for Greek unity-I'm not sure if they'd ever be united by one city state-you still have competition between the strongest for hegemony and Macedonia and Thrace will be pulled deeper into the Greek sphere but beyond that I don't know.

I think you'd still have colonies and Greeks moving to and fro across the mediterrean world.

Interesting what if to be sure.
 
Was the disunity of the greek city-states inevitable, or was it a byproduct of persian puppeteering?
Both are true.
Achemenid interventionism (rather than puppeteering, which would imply sattelized states, when Persians favoured alternatively various alliances) certainly did its lot to keep away the appearance of a strong enough Helladic hegemony on the long-term. But Greeks themselves, with their specific political identity, keep themselves from having this appearing. All the efforts of Achemenids didn't really prevented the appearance of an Athenian hegeôn, which became what Greeks called an archê (more or less, an hegemony relatively to a dominion), and it asked for Helladic states to undergo a geopolitical suicide with the Peloponesian War to really allow Achemenids to get back in the game in style.

Conversly, the Achemenid Empire as a subside provider and creator of social-economical stability in the Middle-East, did participated directly and indirectly to the structuration of Greek states (would it be "politic" or ethnic states) and as @Pellaeon says, was critical into the making of a classical Greek identity.
Not to say that nobody could have filled this role would Achemenids be killed in the crib, but if we go regardless of the reason, into a divided Near-East, it might not be as bright for Greek states (at least in a first term) than it could be tought.

What happens to the Lydian Empire?
Lydia would probably look a lot like a more developped Thracia, IMO. Meaning a more or less philehellenic state, with various clashes about whoever dominates the coastal cities and how deeply, but overall without a real imperial tentation against Greeks IMO, a bit like Egypt at this point.

Could it end up becoming a substitute for the achaemenids in Anatolia face the geeks?
I don't know : computer science being introduced in the Iron Age might be a incommensurable advantage, would geeks or nerds discover electricity and any Anatolian polity beneficing from geek support would be at the very least quite powerful.

Or were its kings mostly uninterested in Greece?
Uninterested? I wouldn't see why : Greece was a commercial and strategical natural focus for everyone involved in an imperial vision in the Near-East. But save possible, altough historically non-obvious, incursion in Thrace and Macedonia (would it be solely as overlord), I'm not sure Lydians would pull something comparable (even proportionally) to Achemenid policy (except if the main Greek polities try something funny in Ionia, but then again, Lydia might be more conciliating with Ionian cities).
That said, the main focus would still be Anatolia, Mesopotamia and the Medes which with time and enough success could pull an Achemenid and transform their confederacies into an actually existing Median Empire (being understood that Herodotos' Median Empire is highely dubious to have ever existed in first place).

What happens to the macedonians?
Maybe even more integrated into the general Greek world than IOTL (the whole "Macedonians ate my baby and are Barbarian" was never that really serious)? Maybe under Lydian hegemony?

And what about greek culture?
Maybe the idea of ONE Greek culture would have an harder time being really rooted ITTL, without big obvious cultural superpower to contrast it. YTou might see a more gradual conception, a bit like Hellenistic identity altough not built on political dominance. I'm under the impression it already began to happen, with considering Anatolian peoples as distant relatives, for exemple, or with various references to links with Egypt.

Colonies?
Colonies are essentially a by-product of factionalism, rather than demographical stress : it was way simpler to send directly or indirectly a bunch of miscontents or political loosers on greener grasses, with the hope they would be useful for once. Depending on what happens ITTL, maybe Ionian cities could send as much than IOTL, if factionalism remains the norm (more or less fueled by Lydian presence). But the whole dynamic was essentially over by the early classical period, so don't expect a new wave of colonies IMO.
 

Don Quijote

Banned
Depends a lot on the POD, because if it's before the rise of Cyrus, then the Medes will quite possibly play a similar role to that of the Persians IOTL. Even if they never produce a great commander in the mould of Cyrus, they're a powerful state and bound to attempt further expansion at some point. If it's to the west, and they are capable of beating the Lydians, then they have the choice of continuing against the Ionians, or instead allying with them, perhaps in return for helping them to defeat Lydia.
 
@Don Quijote
The idea of a Median Empire, or any kind of state, is largely discredited nowadays : there's simply no evidence safe Herodotos on this regard, and it's totally absent archeologically. While we have not much on Medes before the Achemenid Empire, it's more and more considered they formed confederacies (or one super-complex chiefdom?) on the ruins of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, and that their important role within the Achamenid Empire is less the role of a former imperial elite, but of a military auxiliary in the constitution of an imperial state.

It's quite debatable that Medes would have formed an unified state, let alone an imperial superpower, if Persian don't rise up.
 
Top