say rome isnt founded what would happen. will the Etruscans rise as the dominant power in the world. Would Carthage be the dominant force in the Med. in 100 BC Would the Selueciud Empire have survived.
Well, one of the most enduring thing about the Romans was their Republic (yes, even after Caesar & Augustus, they kept to the notion of it being a Republic). Without that notion of government, you'd probably have many more rise and falls of various kingdoms and empires. Liken it to an Ancient World midevalism, with successions of kings fighting over different areas, one or another rising to prominence for a time, and then giving way to someone else.
It was partly the Roman distaste of one man having supreme authority (and all the capriciousness and eventual instability that leads to) that gave them a system for political stability (relative). Combine that with their military discipline, and you had an overwhelming force. Until someone else combined those two forces in a similar way (highly-trained, discplined military with plotical stability) you'd have a much more fragmented Mediterranean - probably kingdoms centered on the various Greek colonies scattered around the rim.
Perhaps the Gauls get enough time to organize into a more coherent force, and play a more indeoendent role in history? A Carthage-splinter state in southern Spain?
'Republic' may be a uniquely Roman word, but it isn't a uniquely Roman concept. Throughout the Greek and Phoenician world, the trend was to move away from absolute rulers - even Carthage, which Rome regarded as its enemy, was always described by Roman writers as being a republic, and equal in terms of political governance to Rome.
The standing army, yes, I will admit, was a Roman invention, but I would say that it arised less due to strokes of genius, but more due to neccessity. Any empire arising in this period would have to eventually assemble a standing army.
There were other republics, yes, but what I'm positing is that it was the balance the Romans found between authority (paired Consuls elected for one year terms) and the checks (Senate) underpinned by popular support (annual elections) that gave them stability. I believe Carthage did have one head-of-state that held the position for long-term, and IIRC was hereditary. That's what I mean.
Well if you readed good i said ´´Rome isnt founded´´
It's quite possible that one of the Italic tribal amphictyonies develops into the hegemon of the peninsula. Rome made itself leader of the Latin League and then ruler of all Italy. A similar development could well have happened in the Oscans, the Samnites, the Sabines or any of the other recently urbansed, Greek-influenced tribal societies. So even if Rome is not founded, a similar power has good chances of arising. In its early days, Rome had rivals in ITaly.
say rome isnt founded what would happen. will the Etruscans rise as the dominant power in the world. Would Carthage be the dominant force in the Med. in 100 BC Would the Selueciud Empire have survived.