Paint Your Chariot With Pride! Reboot of Alexander conquers Arabia timeline

argead_bloodline_stage_1_by_daeres-d4osu38.png


This is something I made up today; it's not yet complete, as a) the minor relatives and branches are missing, b) several spouses have not got dates to go with them yet. But this covers all of the major figures of the Argead Family to around the date of the timeline's 'present day'.

There is a little bit of information I have currently not revealed due to spoilers.
 
Sorry guys, I've been doing a lot of work at the moment and it's been hard to find time to write updates, but there is one in the works and I'm not giving up on the timeline.
 
Sorry guys, I've been doing a lot of work at the moment and it's been hard to find time to write updates, but there is one in the works and I'm not giving up on the timeline.

I can sympathize. Just keep your spirits up and stay dedicated. Know that I'm going to keep both eyes on this Timeline in the meantime.
 
Sorry guys, I've been doing a lot of work at the moment and it's been hard to find time to write updates, but there is one in the works and I'm not giving up on the timeline.

Totally in the same boat as you. Sometimes AH must suffer in the name of actually living haha
 
While I have to work for stuff at the moment, I can snatch a little time for an update that might prove useful. Breaking the faux-history character of the timeline for once, I'm going to directly deal with the similarities and differences between TTL's Argead Empire and OTL's Seleucid Empire. I will divide this by topic to make it clearer to understand.

Argeads vs Seleucids Grudge Match!

1991.01.0845.jpeg


Geographical Span

At its height, the Seleucid Empire controlled the vast majority of Argead territory, extending from Anatolia all the way to north-western India. The major differences is that by this time, the Seleucids had contracted considerably. The Indian satrapies, Bactria, Arachosia, and most of Anatolia had all been lost to various other powers or to rebellion. Additionally, Macedon remained an independent state and an separate successor state to Alexander's Empire. Malta, the westernmost possession of the Argead Empire, was never controlled by a Hellenistic power and passed directly from Carthage to Rome. Likewise, Arabia in OTL was not under the control of any Hellenistic state, although certain Arab states and tribes were. At its height, the Seleucid Empire would have been almost as large as the Argead Empire, but in 200 BCE it was far smaller.

Administration

The techniques used by both Empires to run the Empire and control it are actually quite similar. In the Argead Empire Alexander V doubles the number of satrapies in order to reduce satrapal power, this was also done by the Seleucids (the precise timing of it is difficult to discover). The Royal Roads were used by the Seleucids in much the same manner as the Argeads, with the only major difference being that the Argeads extend the network to encompass more locations. Both Empires were run by direct monarchies with male succession, both almost certainly used a Crown Prince figure in administration. Tax collection, tithes, and levies are all arranged in a very similar manner by both Empires. The most major differences are that the Argeads are a little more assured of not relying on Greek-speakers to guarantee loyalty, and thus have founded less cities than the Seleucids; the resources have instead been spent on infrastructure for the state, such as large logistical forts larger than the equivalent in OTL Seleucid regions. But even at this point some of the basic realities of the two Empires are similar, such as the physical shapes of coins/currency forms and the design of buildings and cities. The Argead Empire simply has more resources to throw at problems.

'Hellenistation'

This is a harder question to answer because of the difficulties of determining how Greek culture spread in OTL. The use of Greek as a prestige and vernacular language is just as strong in the Argead Empire, but the cultural process of Hellenisation is actually both weaker and stronger than in OTL. It is stronger in that Greek culture has been more successful with peoples historically resistant to it, but weaker in that the Empire has also ensured the spread of its non-Greek cultures across a wide area. The literary boom in the Argead Empire has been responsible for transmitting Greek culture east, but also Asian cultures west. It's not just a question of Persians Hellenising, but also Greeks Persifying (for example). There is evidence I'm more familiar with than I was before about Hellenising in the Seleucid Empire, including examples in Uruk of all places. It can be said that the Imperial culture of most of the big Near Eastern Empires tends to get aped by the elites of the territories they control; you even get examples of Assyrian-style goods being produced outside of territories Assyria directly controls in the 8th-7th Centuries BCE, so this sort of thing has a long history. Since this process is working both ways, expect a few new cultures to eventually get created by the Argeads by the mixing of older ones.

Religion

You'd think I'd changed a lot about the religions of the world, but you'd be surprised. Alexander cults did actually exist, although their rituals are unknown to us. Indeed, ruler-cults in the Seleucid Empire begin to sporadically emerge pretty much spontaneously, so their absence is one of the few things I've straight up added/removed from history. Buddhism spread quite far into Arachosia, so all that's happened is that the Argead Empire has had a deeper contact with the religion and the areas interested in it have increased compared to OTL. In general, all that has been done is that the influence of certain religions or practices is increased or decreased compared to the Seleucid Empire. The creation of 'state' cults like the official Alexander Cult of the Argead and Ptolemaic states is also true of OTL history; the Ptolemaic state of OTL created the cult of Serapis in order to lubricate social cohesion between Greeks and Egyptians. What this timeline is seeing is an accelleration of some of the social processes leading to religious evolution; the Alexander Cult is in many ways similar to the Imperial Cult of Rome around the time of the Julio-Claudians, the major difference is that this Cult has a set dogma and is officially moderated from the very beginning by the state. In essence then, the Seleucid Empire was a crowd-pleaser whereas the Argead Empire is both a crowd-pleaser and a religious innovator. This is perhaps the most major structural difference between the two states.

Military

The area with the least difference to OTL between the two states. Both states rely upon a combination of Macedonian phalangites, professional units inherited from the previous state, levied units from cities and satrapies, and mercenaries. Both the Argeads and Seleucids recognised the value of heavy cavalry when they encountered it, and developed the kataphractoi. The only real difference is probably that more non-Macedonians have been trained in phalanx warfare by the Argeads than the Seleucids did. Ironically, the Argeads probably also possess more Macedonian troops/cavalry overall due to their lack of constant conflict with the Ptolemies compared to the OTL Syrian Wars. In essence the Argead military is nearly the same as the Seleucid military but is simply larger.
 
Resurgam! A History of the Roman Republic


10162541_dfb67ca972.jpg



The Birthing Pains of Italy

aged_southern_italy_in_200_bce_by_daeres-d4npswx.png

Major Cities of Southern Italy in 200 BCE


The world of Magna Graecia had always been one of extremes. Cities were bigger than their Greek counterparts, more beautiful, more powerful. Conflicts were bloodier and more brutal. It was not uncommon (particularly in the 6th and 5th centuries BCE) for uppity cities to simply be wiped off the map. It was this fractious, dangerous community that someone found itself drawn towards unity in the early 3rd Century BCE. The proposed alliance was known as the Italiote League. But Syrakuse, the largest Hellenic city in the world at that time, would have none of it. It military intervened in Magna Graecia as soon as it looked like the League might actually come together. The poleis of Italy then reverted into competing alliances, but its history was forever altered by the city of Rome in 280 BCE.


The Romans had been on the radar of the Hellenes in Italy for nearly five decades, but sudden aggression took them by surprise. They turned to the Hellenic League in Greece for aid, who jumped at the chance to enhance their prestige. Despite the alarming presence of a barbarian invasion back home in Greece, the Hellenes and Romans duked it out for six years. The Hellenes had won early victories against Rome, but relations between the allies quickly turned sour after a contingent of Athenians decided to attempt to set up a colony in Sicily. Eventually it was clear that a Roman victory was only a matter of time. Fortunately for the Hellenes, Aisa (or Fate) intervened, for the barbarian invasion that had threatened their homelands now in turn threatened Italy. Rome was forced to sign a hurried peace that left Magna Graecia alone and under the protection of the Hellenic League.

The League forces returned home rather smug at their victory, but did absolutely nothing to solve the political disunity of Magna Graecia. In essence, they had merely become a proxy to be wielded against the Romans, and the more disunited they were the better. The Romans had refocused their attention to the North in the wake of the Gallic invasion, and had abandoned their interest in controlling Magna Graecia. But events conspired to align the interests of the Hellenic League with those of Rome; Carthage, newly aggressive, was a power that the entire rest of the Mediterranean distrusted. As such, Italiote Greeks helped construct Rome's first navies, crewed their ships, and sent contingents of soldiers to fight in Sicily in both Punic Wars. This fundamentally altered the relationship between Rome and Italiotes.

In 205 BCE, the Second and final Punic War had just finished. Rome and her allies were celebrating victory after the long and bloody conflict whilst also taking reprisals against those in the Italian peninsula who had sided with Carthage. Magna Graecia had been for many years dominated by three major alliances; the Brentesion-Kallipolis alliance, the city of Taras and its hinterland, and a League of states headed by Metapontion. With no Carthaginian Empire left to fight, it seemed likely that petty conflict would erupt again. This was not to be the case, as negotiations soon began. These negotiations were in pursuit of resurrecting an Italiote League, and it found many willing ears. In 199 BCE the Constitution of the Italiote League was signed by the cities of Taras, Kallipolis, Brentesion, Kroton, Metapontion, Cosentia, Petelia, Thurii, Pyxos, Elea, Poseidonia, Barion, and Herakleia.

Conspicuous by their absence were all of the Greek cities in the toe of Italy; Kaulonia, Rhegion, Hipponion etc. They had come under strong influence from Syrakuse, which was once again in prominence after being awarded control over formerly Hellenic League territory in Sicily. They then opposed the league on rather obscure religious grounds, and absolutely refused to sign the Constitution. The situation threatened to get out of hand quickly, with Syrakuse being conspicuous by its silence on the matter of intervention. However, the Italiotes were about to change all the rules of the game.

From the very beginning the Italiotes had felt that they were not strong enough to compete against the powerful Mediterranean states directly; the Hellenic League (now reformed as the League of Persian Remembrance) was busy having adventures in Crete, and the Argead Empire had lost interest in the western Mediterranean following the humiliation of Carthage. With both of their traditional allies out of the running, they turned to the Mediterranean's newest superpower. Rome. The Romans leapt at the chance to effectively unify the Italian peninsula, and signed a treaty of alliance with the Italiote League. At a stroke the plans of Syrakuse and their allies were utterly ruined. The fallout from this would eventually lead to a war anyway, but it was a war the Italiotes were now confident of winning. This fundamentally altered the diplomatic balance of the Mediterranean, as the Romans had now definitively left the orbit of the Argead Empire and its alliance system. Instead the Romans were now free to act as their own power for the first time in eighty years. Italy had also undergone radical changes in that time; Gauls, Veneti, Etruscans, Italians and Greeks were now united under the leadership of Rome. It would prove an interesting harbinger for the century ahead.


Who Was Alexander Indikos? A Fresh Perspective


Chapter 1: The Expedition


StupaSanchi222.jpg


Alexander Indikos is one of the most mysterious figures of the ancient world that are known to have historically existed. He looms large in history, and yet the body of his life is fairly short in terms of known facts. The only cohesive narrative associated with him is his most famous deed, the conquest of India. This is a tale told in both Argead Greek and Helleno-Indian sources, which can provide interesting contrasts. What is known for sure about Alexander Indikos before 226 BCE is that he was a member of the Argead Royal Family, that he was at the very apogee of the Perso-Macedonian aristocratic elite, and that he was related to the main Alexandrian line of Kings. It has been suggested that the first historical reference to him is in a list of royal family members, with him listed as Anasander by a process of deduction. So why choose the name Alexander? It has been suggested that by this point, 'Alexander' was as much a title as it was an actual name, and that upon becoming a King in his own right he adopted a name more suited to his new station.

His tale begins upon the accession of Amyntas to the Argead throne. It is likely that he either supported the coup that brought Amyntas to power, or that he was neutral; there are no known sources to suggest that any of the Royal Family opposed him. Unfortunately for both the Royal Family and Amyntas, his son was in a position to throw everything into jeopardy by confiscating property and executing satrap left and right. This impacted upon Alexander Indikos because he had been a satrap in Colchis; his posting their further indicates that he was considered trustworthy, as only those closest to the Emperor in trust were assigned border marches and satraps to command. When word reached him that he as possibly about to be executed, he took the rather sensible option of fleeing, arriving in the Baktrian satrapies sometime in 226 BCE.

There is one important fact about Alexander Indikos that has not yet been mentioned; he was a Buddhist. It's not known to what branch of Buddhism he belonged, but it is an important element in understanding what was to take place. At this point it was important because in Baktria he found a welcoming Greco-Buddhist community. The Baktrian satraps, and the satrap of the border march in particular, had always had a specific set of interests with regards to the Empire's security. Nomadic tribes, in particular the Saka, had targeted this region for defeat for more than a century, and it was only recently that the tribe of the 'Great Saka' (Massagetai) had been finally pacified. Now it was eastwards that their wary eyes turned; the Mauryan Empire of India had been a stalwart ally to the Argeads since the time of Alexander IV, but after the death of Ashoka a few years earlier the mighty edifice had begun to crumble. Trying to peel apart propaganda and legend from the truth is hard. What seems to have been the case is that Ashoka's designated successor was rejected due to his blindness, and a replacement was found for him who was dominated by the King's Ministers. The already somewhat decentralised Empire had begun to fracture at the seams and it is possible that it had already been divided into sections by Ashoka upon his death.

Baktria -and Arachosia- had been having troubles enough just dealing with one hostile border. The prospect of gaining an even more hostile border was of prime concern. There was also a religious dimension; India was the birthplace and centre of Buddhism, and seeing it fall into chaos could not have been an easy thing for Greco-Buddhists to live with. To add to the cocktail of interests, Hellenes were already living in India; notwithstanding the Hellenes living in Argead India, there was a healthy community of expatriates in the Maurya Empire itself. In particular, there were members of the Argead Royal Family and their descendants who had been married to various Mauryan kings and princesses. Ignoring the outbreak of civil war in Babylon, the far-eastern satraps instead concentrated on this project.

Very quickly, Alexander Indikos became a leading figure in this project. He was charismatic, and had the same talent for charm as Alexander V and Phillip IV. In addition, he had something they did not; religious fervour. Argead sources find it patronising, Helleno-Indian sources find it inspiring, but all of them mention his strong belief in establishing a universal dharma for mankind. The usual translation in Greek for Dharma is Dike, though the two concepts are not quite equivalent; Dike more specifically referred to justice determined by common practice. Having become its major figure, he set about the task of actually organising the expedition. The Argead Royal Army was clearly out of the question, so they would be relying on three sources for troops; garrisons, the personal forces of the satraps, and levies. The assembly point of Nikaia was chosen, and in 225 BCE there was a sudden exodus of armed forces from the Argead Empire's eastern frontier. Either the Argead observers declined to report this due to the civil war, or their messages fell on death ears, for the expedition assembled in Nikaia without any harassment.

The first major objective set by Alexander was gaining a foothold in Maurya territory before the monsoon began. The army advanced to the city known in Greek as Sagala, the easternmost city on the border with India. By crossing the Sutlej river Alexander was declaring war on the Mauryans, and once it was crossed there would be no turning back. Initially he met no opposition, as the 'King' that now ruled these lands was in the midst of war already. Skirting around the Great Desert, the expedition made its way to the important Buddhist centre of Meerut. In Helleno-Indian tradition, this was when Alexander first proclaimed his mission of re-uniting the Mauryan Empire into one dharma. If true, clearly Meerut was considered insufficient, for straight after the city capitulated Alexander headed for Indraprastha. This city was the de facto capital of the North-Western Mauryans, and needed to be taken if the expedition was to continue.

Unfortunately for Alexander, two problems quickly arose. The first was that the city had only a small Buddhist population, shared religion was not able to be used as an asset. The second was that the local 'King' had no intention of losing his capital, and had hurried back to defend it. Thus the assembled army faced its first true opposition . As is ever the case with battles, mythologising has interfered with understanding this meeting from a tactical perspective. It is likely that the heavy kataphractoi were used as the main shock weapon against the Indians, the extant accounts all name them as having taken part. What is certain is the result, which was the defeat of the self proclaimed 'King of Indraprastha' and the subsequent capitulation of Indraprastha itself. Alexander was still in the midst of hostile territory; many cities nearby had not been captured yet, much of the countryside was not pacified, and regular reinforcements from Hellenic territory seemed unlikely. Nonetheless he had got his foot in the door, and did not plan to stay idle as his army awaited the end of the monsoon.
 
Another great update. Surely, though, the Argeads can't take over the whole Indian subcontinent and still manage it? That would seem almost impossible considering how vast their territories are already.

Very interested about the transformation of the Hellenic League into the League of Persian Remembrence (whatever THAT means)!
 
This TL is amazing and I truly regret overlooking it earlier, this reads really well and seems like a potential AH.com classic to me.
 
let's bump this.

Daeres, I could go for an update, you can't let my TL catch up too much, can you ;)
 
Top