One thing that strongly differentiated Rome from the Hellenic city-states was her vast demographic growth and potential. When facing Pyrrhus of Epirus, Rome was able to absorb horrific casualties that would have crippled a Greek state in similar circumstances. During the Punic Wars, Rome again showed an astounding ability to raise army after army in the face of defeats, even in Italia itself.
Contrast this performance with the Athenians and Spartans before the Macedonian conquests.
Beginning with Sparta... Spartan hoplites were well-trained and well-armed, with a deserved reputation for skill and valor. The fact that Spartan warriors would be trained in phalanx warfare from the beginning, and likely were to have superior experience relative to their mercenary or citizen-army opponents, meant that a Spartan phalanx was far more likely to hold its ground in the massive crush of a typical Hellenic battle. If a phalanx does not break in morale, and is not effectively flanked or attacked from the rear, it will either survive or win. These great benefits of Spartan warrior ethos notwithstanding, Sparta's society was very weak. Each highly-trained spartiate represented a massive investment of resources diverted from Sparta's helot and foreigner-run economy. Consequently, losing such men would be like a modern great power losing a capital ship--an expensive and potentially irreplaceable loss. Ultimately, Sparta was demographically and economically doomed to decline and weakness by this system, especially as it was very rare for any to be accepted into full Spartan citizenship. Heavy Spartan practice of exposure did not of course help either. A particularly glaring example of Sparta's weakness on this front is the humiliating desperation on their part following the siege of Pylos and capture of several Spartiates. Rome in their position would have barely batted an eye, but Sparta placed so much value in those whom their society had invested so much, that their loss was unacceptabe
Turning to Athens, we've got a Ionian mirror to Dorian Sparta. Athens was the storied cradle of democracy, built on the great value the common citizen provided to the city as rowing sailors and soldiers in the Athenian navy and commercial exploits. Athens was a much more open society (though that can be overstated), and an economically more capitalist one. Urban moneyed interests present there were utterly alien to Spartan society, or for that matter, the early native Romans. Athens however shared with Sparta a highly restricted citizenship and franchise. Metics, resident free non-citizens, were common, and lacked an easy or even predictable route to full social integration. Unlike Rome, but like the rest of Hellenic Greece, if slaves were freed, they did not gain a limited form of citizenship, and their children would not have the opportunity to be recognized as full Roman citizens at birth. So despite the economic attractiveness of Athens in its golden age, despite the Delian League or Athenian Empire, despite the more open and mutable nature of Athenian politics and society, Athens was also subject to demographic weakness and erosion, most obviously in the latter stages of the Peloponessian war.
This kind of restriction of citizenship was typical of Hellenic Greece in general, and made Rome appear very strange indeed to Greeks later on. I'm not sure it was clearly recognized as a source of weakness of the Greek city-states at the time, or that Rome's ability to demographically advance, and absorb its allies and subjects of the Latin League, and later throughout Italia was such a crucial advantage to the Republic.
Regardless of whether it was recognized by ancient thinkers, how might an alternate Athenian citizenship develop that included clear paths to full (legal) inclusion into Athenian society and government? It need not be a clone of the Roman model, save for offering a similar demographic and politically assimilative advantage. Naturally, the ideal POD and shift is as subtle as possible, leaving a generally recognizable Athens from the viewpoint of OTL.
For my own speculation, a more rapidly growing Athens likely would be even more intensively urban and maritime, as population growth outstrips the ability of Attica to feed Athens-Piraeus sans imports from elsewhere, similar to the early Roman trade with Sicily. For Athens, this also means the grain supply and sea lanes must be protected, and commercial interests will maintain internal pressure for state support of their rights and trade with other cities and nations beyond Greece.
The Persian wars (if they happen) give this Athens an enemy and outward focus for expansion (Ionia, Cyprus, Black Sea, Egypt?) of Athenian influence, trade, and colonies. I for one suspect that Persia and Athens would still come to blows eventually, even though the circumstances could be different. Athenian support for their Ionian brethren under the Persian yoke across the Aegean is bound to spark a confrontation eventually, even without considering the commercial competition from the Phoenicians in the Persian Empire. Now this could simply lead to all Greece crushed and brought into the Persian orbit (or just Athens and her allies), but Greek advantages aren't appreciably lessened by improved Athenian demographics.
If Sparta, Corinth, Thebes (or some combination thereof) choose to challenge Athens' expansionism, it (or they) would face a far more difficult foe, one holding a grander maritime Empire, and able to replace losses from plague or combat with much less strain. It may be that the Greek cities move to balance greater Athenian power through a greater alignment against it, but they would remain suffused with their own weaknesses and divisions that Athens would exploit, while the Athenians would have allies of their own (willing or subjects) regardless.
Accepting for a moment the possibility of ultimate Athenian ascendancy over Greece, such a grand and growing thassalocracy serves as a grave danger to Persian strength in southwest Asia. While I suspect an Alexander-style conquest to be less likely from an Athens-dominated Greece, I rather suspect that much of Persia's western periphery would be chipped away. Athens had supported Egyptian revolts in the past, and would be well placed to do so again and again until they succeed. The Ionian cities would be under continual threats from Persian Anatolia, possibly resulting in wars from pass to pass until the gates of Tarsus in an unending search for a final border. Cyprus too, would have to be brought into the Athenian orbit if only to deny the Persians access to their ships. Phoenicia would be a challenge for this kind of piecemeal expansion, but might well be relegated to gradual decline as a result of Greek dominance on the sea.
The Black sea and Balkans offer opportunities for this Athenian thassalocracy to begin a new wave of colonization, following the trade routes of grain, amber, furs, and probably wood.
I think that's about as far as I'd choose to speculate without a clear POD or specific change to bring about Athens' alternate demography.
Any thoughts on how to offer an expanding Athenian citizen class in some manner similar to Rome?
Contrast this performance with the Athenians and Spartans before the Macedonian conquests.
Beginning with Sparta... Spartan hoplites were well-trained and well-armed, with a deserved reputation for skill and valor. The fact that Spartan warriors would be trained in phalanx warfare from the beginning, and likely were to have superior experience relative to their mercenary or citizen-army opponents, meant that a Spartan phalanx was far more likely to hold its ground in the massive crush of a typical Hellenic battle. If a phalanx does not break in morale, and is not effectively flanked or attacked from the rear, it will either survive or win. These great benefits of Spartan warrior ethos notwithstanding, Sparta's society was very weak. Each highly-trained spartiate represented a massive investment of resources diverted from Sparta's helot and foreigner-run economy. Consequently, losing such men would be like a modern great power losing a capital ship--an expensive and potentially irreplaceable loss. Ultimately, Sparta was demographically and economically doomed to decline and weakness by this system, especially as it was very rare for any to be accepted into full Spartan citizenship. Heavy Spartan practice of exposure did not of course help either. A particularly glaring example of Sparta's weakness on this front is the humiliating desperation on their part following the siege of Pylos and capture of several Spartiates. Rome in their position would have barely batted an eye, but Sparta placed so much value in those whom their society had invested so much, that their loss was unacceptabe
Turning to Athens, we've got a Ionian mirror to Dorian Sparta. Athens was the storied cradle of democracy, built on the great value the common citizen provided to the city as rowing sailors and soldiers in the Athenian navy and commercial exploits. Athens was a much more open society (though that can be overstated), and an economically more capitalist one. Urban moneyed interests present there were utterly alien to Spartan society, or for that matter, the early native Romans. Athens however shared with Sparta a highly restricted citizenship and franchise. Metics, resident free non-citizens, were common, and lacked an easy or even predictable route to full social integration. Unlike Rome, but like the rest of Hellenic Greece, if slaves were freed, they did not gain a limited form of citizenship, and their children would not have the opportunity to be recognized as full Roman citizens at birth. So despite the economic attractiveness of Athens in its golden age, despite the Delian League or Athenian Empire, despite the more open and mutable nature of Athenian politics and society, Athens was also subject to demographic weakness and erosion, most obviously in the latter stages of the Peloponessian war.
This kind of restriction of citizenship was typical of Hellenic Greece in general, and made Rome appear very strange indeed to Greeks later on. I'm not sure it was clearly recognized as a source of weakness of the Greek city-states at the time, or that Rome's ability to demographically advance, and absorb its allies and subjects of the Latin League, and later throughout Italia was such a crucial advantage to the Republic.
Regardless of whether it was recognized by ancient thinkers, how might an alternate Athenian citizenship develop that included clear paths to full (legal) inclusion into Athenian society and government? It need not be a clone of the Roman model, save for offering a similar demographic and politically assimilative advantage. Naturally, the ideal POD and shift is as subtle as possible, leaving a generally recognizable Athens from the viewpoint of OTL.
For my own speculation, a more rapidly growing Athens likely would be even more intensively urban and maritime, as population growth outstrips the ability of Attica to feed Athens-Piraeus sans imports from elsewhere, similar to the early Roman trade with Sicily. For Athens, this also means the grain supply and sea lanes must be protected, and commercial interests will maintain internal pressure for state support of their rights and trade with other cities and nations beyond Greece.
The Persian wars (if they happen) give this Athens an enemy and outward focus for expansion (Ionia, Cyprus, Black Sea, Egypt?) of Athenian influence, trade, and colonies. I for one suspect that Persia and Athens would still come to blows eventually, even though the circumstances could be different. Athenian support for their Ionian brethren under the Persian yoke across the Aegean is bound to spark a confrontation eventually, even without considering the commercial competition from the Phoenicians in the Persian Empire. Now this could simply lead to all Greece crushed and brought into the Persian orbit (or just Athens and her allies), but Greek advantages aren't appreciably lessened by improved Athenian demographics.
If Sparta, Corinth, Thebes (or some combination thereof) choose to challenge Athens' expansionism, it (or they) would face a far more difficult foe, one holding a grander maritime Empire, and able to replace losses from plague or combat with much less strain. It may be that the Greek cities move to balance greater Athenian power through a greater alignment against it, but they would remain suffused with their own weaknesses and divisions that Athens would exploit, while the Athenians would have allies of their own (willing or subjects) regardless.
Accepting for a moment the possibility of ultimate Athenian ascendancy over Greece, such a grand and growing thassalocracy serves as a grave danger to Persian strength in southwest Asia. While I suspect an Alexander-style conquest to be less likely from an Athens-dominated Greece, I rather suspect that much of Persia's western periphery would be chipped away. Athens had supported Egyptian revolts in the past, and would be well placed to do so again and again until they succeed. The Ionian cities would be under continual threats from Persian Anatolia, possibly resulting in wars from pass to pass until the gates of Tarsus in an unending search for a final border. Cyprus too, would have to be brought into the Athenian orbit if only to deny the Persians access to their ships. Phoenicia would be a challenge for this kind of piecemeal expansion, but might well be relegated to gradual decline as a result of Greek dominance on the sea.
The Black sea and Balkans offer opportunities for this Athenian thassalocracy to begin a new wave of colonization, following the trade routes of grain, amber, furs, and probably wood.
I think that's about as far as I'd choose to speculate without a clear POD or specific change to bring about Athens' alternate demography.
Any thoughts on how to offer an expanding Athenian citizen class in some manner similar to Rome?