Probability of a state creating a Mediterranean girdling empire if not Rome?

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
What were the odds of a Mediterranean-girdling empire, especially one that has not just coastal enclaves, but a contiguous land presence around most of the sea, in the event Rome does not rise into that position?

What other polities might be best-positioned to do that?

Another Italian city state we hardly think of, or a Kingdom like the Etruscans?

the Carthaginians?

A Macedonian or Diadochi based empire?

An enduring Persian empire

a Gallic empire

a Berber or Mauretanian empire

a Greek-speaking polis in Greece, Sicily or the west med pulls a Rome?

an empire based on some now obscure ethnic group like Thracians, Illyrians, Dacians, Phrygians or other Anatolian peoples?

An Iberian empire

A Germanic, Scythian, Slavic or Sarmatian empire

If we wanted a polity based on a major European island like Cyprus, Rhodes, Crete, Sicily, Sardinia, Corsica, Majorca or Crimea have a decent shot at forming a Mediterranean-wide thalassocracy or coastal empire or more, which island would be the most plausible point of origin for it?
 
Last edited:

libbrit

Banned
Greece was too fractuous-the city states fought eachother as much as worked together.

Id go for Carthage.
 
None really. The best I can see Carthage doing is getting control of Massalia over time on the coast of Gaul (without Rome to protect them Massalia is going to have to turn to some power for protection or get conquered), maybe all of Sicily (though how much they actually wanted all of Sicily is debatable), some holdings on the toe of Italy (Rhegion) to control the strait there, maybe control of Crete, and Spain.

What's doable I think is a western Mediterranean "empire" holding the coast (see Carthage above) and an eastern Mediterranean empire from one of the Hellenistic states controlling the eastern Mediterranean. The odds of any other state getting control of the entire Mediterranean is slim to none I think.
 
More likely than not, a multi-polar Mediterranean. Diadachi, Carthaginians, a Magna Grecian league. It could take centuries to shake out before a predominant power emerged, if ever.
 
More likely than not, a multi-polar Mediterranean. Diadachi, Carthaginians, a Magna Grecian league. It could take centuries to shake out before a predominant power emerged, if ever.
Yeah, I can't see Syracuse surviving as an independent power on its own for good. To prevent Carthaginian conquest the most likely outcome seems either they are absorbed into a revived Italiot League or they are strong enough to conquer Magna Graecia themselves.
 
Greece was too fractuous-the city states fought eachother as much as worked together.

Id go for Carthage.

Athens with more sensible controls on the powers of the assembly, could have done much better than it did. The problem would be incorporating the poleis into a situation where they were not treated like vassals. If that were achieved (big if) then they have a fair chance.

I'd first have Alcibiades be allowed to lead the Sicillian expedition as opposed to attempting to put him on trial, but giving him the chance to defect, as really happened. He really harmed the Athenian war effort (before returning and nearly giving them victory). If Sicily succeeds, or even if it doesn't end in massive failure then Athens could win the Peloponnesian war.

With most of the Aegean and Sicily behind them the Athenians may be able to spread. (If they can bear to allow conquered peoples the ability to also benefit, but given how jealously they guarded their citizenship it's not the easiest sell.)
 
Another Italian city state we hardly think of, or a Kingdom like the Etruscans?

Well, Etruscans may have a far better rap, would it be only because they influenced much continental Europe, approximately as much as Greeks in the West, maybe more in central Europe.

Now would their decentralized occupation of Italy, with their league being more of a ceremonial institution than a real and coercive one, be able to really repeal Celts and take over Italian federations (as Samnits)? That's another thing.
I would rather see them having the same role than Greeks in Balkans : keeping their independence, influencing much their neighbours, and forming some hegemon of their own (maybe imperial ones in the long terms)

the Carthaginians?
Basically what slydessertfox said with some reserves (see after). Carthage was quite similar to Rome on many regards, but may have lacked the territorial anchorage that helped them to eat little by little their neighbour up to be not only hegemonic but monopolizing politically.

In spite of a strong authority, Carthage never really managed to fully unify or force to unify familial interests or other submitted cities interests.

A Macedonian or Diadochi based empire?
A bit too distant and focused on the wealthier East (with as well more dangerous rivals). If Seleucids manage to get their shit together, they could form an Helleno-Persian entity that may become a superpower with hegemony in Eastern Mediterranea (think Ottoman Empire lines), but I doubt they would focus on the western part (less rich, and risk of being overstretched)

An enduring Persian empire
Well, it does have more chances to end as a superpower (see Seleucids), but it would be probably more focused, as IOTL, on Eastern Mediterranean and Arabia than interested going west, when using client states/vassals or further "friends".

a Gallic empire
Definitely not. Celts is essentially defining a civilisation, an ensemble of cultures with common references and ground but extremly diverse politically.
You could most probably see the rise of Celtic kingdoms/hegeoms/confederations (more or less hellenized for some) as IOTL and an enduring strong celtic power in North-Western Europe, of course.

a Berber or Mauretanian empire
Maur and Berber or Numids designate roughly the same group of peoples. Basically...with Carthage still on the ranks and not annoyed by Rome, all of these are likely to remain under Punic "benevolent supervision".

a Greek-speaking polis in Greece, Sicily or the west med pulls a Rome?
Well, you have room for local hegemony. Sicilians and Gallic hellenistic entities proven able IOTL to establish their dominion on their neighbours relativly easily.
It's to be noted they did so with the indirect or direct roman support, though. I'm not too sure how well they'll turn with Carthage there.

an empire based on some now obscure ethnic group like Thracians, Illyrians, Dacians, Phrygians or other Anatolian peoples?
Well, Dacians proved being able to pull an imposing state (compared to previous situations, with diverse tribal states and confederations) under Burebista, and I don't see why it shouldn't happen anew.
That said, Illyrians were extremly diverse (again, a convenient name for people as different as Iapydes (mix of Veneti and Celts) and Dardani (mix of Illyrians and Thracians)

An Iberian empire
Pre-Roman Spain is a clusterfuck of peoples with diverse and non-exclusive influences and identities.

There again, you could possibly have local hegemons (as with Elesyces), but Punic influence (commercial and political) would be still quite huge.

You'd tell me that pre-Roman Italy wasn't really better. Fair enough. But it was a region roughly unified culturally and politically by Etrusceans and hellenistic influence : Spain was less so and offered a less interesting position.

A Germanic, Scythian, Slavic or Sarmatian empire

Germans, as we understand it, would probably not exist. It was essentially coming from the differentiation between Galli and Germani made by Caesar on a geographical scale. Effectively, the difference was limited (originally German people were deeply influenced by Celts, if not Celts themselves)

Slavic peoples, for similar reasons, may end not existing at all, ethnologically speaking. The pre-Proto Slavic (meaning not even the group before Slavs) were generally included among Scythians or other great groups of the region and didn't formed distinct strong groups we know about before the Middle-Ages.

Scythians and Sarmatians are roughly the same thing. I could see them pulling an Avar or a Magyar in Europe, but I don't think they would have the structures or power to takeover the best parts of Mediterranean Europe. More likely form hellenized entities as Celts did before.
Maybe taking over Persia?

None really. The best I can see Carthage doing is getting control of Massalia over time on the coast of Gaul (without Rome to protect them Massalia is going to have to turn to some power for protection or get conquered)
Celto-Ligurians and Celto-Iberians would probably take the best of it if Massalia is to be conquered. Federations such as Salyes in Provence or Elisyces in Languedoc seem to have known quite an inner dynamism by the third century BC.

(IOTL this dynamism was broken by roman interventionism in the region. Without this, I could see it continuing mixing native, italic and hellenistic features)

Doesn't mean that these entities couldn't have ties with Carthago, but I'd tend to think that it would be more on clientelist and commercial influences lines.
 
What were the odds of a Mediterranean-girdling empire, especially one that has not just coastal enclaves, but a contiguous land presence around most of the sea, in the event Rome does not rise into that position?

What other polities might be best-positioned to do that?

Another Italian city state we hardly think of, or a Kingdom like the Etruscans?

the Carthaginians?

A Macedonian or Diadochi based empire?

An enduring Persian empire

a Gallic empire

a Berber or Mauretanian empire

a Greek-speaking polis in Greece, Sicily or the west med pulls a Rome?

an empire based on some now obscure ethnic group like Thracians, Illyrians, Dacians, Phrygians or other Anatolian peoples?

An Iberian empire

A Germanic, Scythian, Slavic or Sarmatian empire

If we wanted a polity based on a major European island like Cyprus, Rhodes, Crete, Sicily, Sardinia, Corsica, Majorca or Crimea have a decent shot at forming a Mediterranean-wide thalassocracy or coastal empire or more, which island would be the most plausible point of origin for it?

If you had asked in the VI-th century BC what were the odds of a Mediterranean-girdling Roman empire - everybody would have laughed the ass off. The best chance this funny little town of Rome has is dominate Italy which is very very very hard and virtually improbable.

Even in the IV-III centuries B.C. Rome making Mediterranean Empire of Augustus Caesar Octavian scale was a BIG(!) question. I mean the Romans might defeat all those lands and peoples, plunder them, make them pay some tribute, vassalize them to some extent, make them 'Roman friends and clients' - yes, sure. But making an Empire out of all these various huge territories - no, no way.
Rome was not built for that. I mean Rome was made to conquer Italy and holding a few oversea provinces. I mean Roman republic was not meant to run such a huge Empire.

But...
... but Rome changed. It was a long painful process of changes from republic to principate. (Well, actually some changes had started during golden age of republic and they were sometimes painful as hell).
And in the long run Rome was able to make a Mediterranean-girdling empire.


So, my point here is that it is more correct to ask:
1) Is it possible for an entity to conquer a big chunk of Mediterranean?
2) What are the odds that after such a conquest this polity might change and thereafter make a nice Mediterranean-girdling empire? :)
 

TFSmith121

Banned
One point about Rome is that it is pretty central

Both in terms of the Italian Peninsula specifically and the Mediterranean generally, which was certainly handy in terms of transportation, communications, and access to both the eastern and western med, Northern Africa, and the European littoral of the med...

The Iberian, Balkan, and Anatolian peninsulas do not enjoy as useful a location, and the southern Med littoral, certainly west of Egypt, was not as rich in terms of arable lands generally and a useful interior.

Rome, or at least a city state turned "nation/empire" on the Italian peninsula much like it has some pretty hefty advantages over pretty much everywhere else in the Med.

Best,
 
Top