Res Publica Invicta: The Roman Republic Triumphant

Introduction
  • Introduction
    I enjoy writing Roman timelines that go on for a few centuries, until I come up with a POD that fascinates me more. This is one of those times... sort of. This is not an indication that I’m abandoning my timeline about the Byzantines becoming a republic and doing better because of it. That timeline will continue, but I avoided turning it into a complete Byzantine-wank. This is my attempt at a genuine Roman-wank.

    What can you expect in this timeline?
    - Earlier but not implausible technological developments
    - A more stable Roman Republic
    - A more expansive Rome

    What will I try to avoid in this timeline?
    - Giving the Romans gunpowder so they can curbstomp the known world
    - Aeolipile-powered chariots
    - Romans winning their battles against everyone (regardless of what the title of this TL actually means)

    So, in short, a relatively grounded Rome-wank. I will avoid the temptation to use conceits like listing all the dates in AUC, but this will be written largely from an 'in-universe' perspective.

    I will also try to incorporate public domain visuals, largely from wikimedia sources where possible. If anyone thinks there’s any images I shouldn’t use, let me know! As with my Byzantine timeline, I will use EU4 as a template for making maps, as it is super easy to do so.
     
    Last edited:
    The End of the Punic War (255 BC)
  • The End of the Punic War (255 BC)

    The Punic War was a conflict that raged between the Roman and Carthaginian Republics between 264 BC and 255 BC, ending with the Roman invasion of Africa by an army under the command of Marcus Atilius Regulus. The war began due to a convoluted dispute over the city of Messana, occupied by mercenaries known as Mamartines. The mercenaries appealed to both states for protection, and though the Romans were generally loathe to side with such men, they felt they could not pass up the opportunity to gain a foothold on the island of Sicily or allow the Carthaginians to strengthen their own position on the island. The war that broke out was predominantly fought on Sicily, until the Romans decided to launch an invasion of their enemy's homeland of Africa.

    Marcus Atilius Regulus landed in Africa in 256 BC and quickly attacked the city of Aspis. After he secured the city for his forces, he met the Carthaginians in open battle at the city of Adys. The Carthaginians, under the leadership of general Hamilcar, who had been recalled from Sicily to face the Romans, had encamped on high ground overlooking the city. Though it would seem to have been a very defensible position, the terrain neutralized the cavalry and elephants of the Carthaginian army, and Regulus was quick to ascertain that self-imposed disadvantage. The Romans, well experienced in the art of fighting in broken ground, assaulted the Carthaginians and inflicted a devastating defeat upon them. The defeated army fled and the Carthaginian leaders decided to sue for peace with Regulus.

    Regulus was eager to be hailed as the victor in the long war, but he also wanted to ensure that the peace was as profitable as possible for the Romans. After two solid victories in the homeland of his enemy, he felt that he could dictate terms that were utterly humiliating for the Carthaginians; if they refused, he would just defeat them in battle once more, and then they would have to accept his terms, or even harsher terms if he saw fit. To bolster his position, Regulus sent envoys to Gala, the king of the Numidian Massylii tribe, who inhabited the land just west of Carthage. The Numidian cavalry were absolutely essential to the Carthaginian military, and were renowned throughout the Western Mediterranean for their prowess. Regulus was able to win Gala over to the Roman side with promises of aid against his own neighbors, the Masaesyli, a rival Numidian tribe.

    Unaware that Gala had changed sides in the war, the Carthaginian leaders refused the terms that Regulus offered them:
    - Carthage would cede all their territory in Sicily and Sardinia (and presumably Corsica, as well, as ancient sources tend to lump the two islands together)
    - All Roman hostages were to be freed, all Carthaginian hostages were to be ransomed
    - Carthage would pay Rome an indemnity for the cost of the war
    - Carthage would pay Rome an annual tribute
    - Carthage's navy was limited to 1 warship, though they were expected to provide 50 triremes at Rome's request
    - Carthage would make neither war nor peace without Rome's consent

    These terms would have made Carthage nothing more than a client of the Roman Republic - albeit a prosperous one - which is why they were utterly unacceptable. Further, the Carthaginians had hired a Spartan general by the name of Xanthippos who, upon reviewing the military of Carthage, determined that it was poor leadership that had cost them their recent battles, and, if well organized, the Carthaginians could easily hold their own and defeat the Romans.

    Thus, when the two sides met in battle shortly thereafter, near the River Bagradas, the Carthaginian army was much better arrayed and sought battle on land more suitable to their large contingent of cavalry and elephants. The Carthaginian forces numbered roughly 12,000 infantry, 4,000 cavalry (split roughly evenly between Carthaginian and Numidian horsemen), and 100 elephants. The Roman army was composed of 15,000 infantry and only 500 cavalry. The Carthaginian commanders allowed Xanthippos to take overall command of the battle, due to his expertise and rapport with the soldiers. The battle was begun when the Carthaginian elephants charged the Roman center, and disrupted the infantry, the bulk of the Roman force. The Carthaginian cavalry, meanwhile, were maneuvering to encircle the Roman army and trap them in a pincer while they were held in place. The Roman right flank was holding its own and advancing, while the Roman left flank was not. However, just when victory seemed to be close for the Carthaginians, the Numidian cavalry defected and turned on the Carthaginian forces. Now it was the Carthaginians were were trapped in a pincer, as their flanks were utterly crushed and their elephants driven to panic. The large beast fled in several directions, and though they trampled many Carthaginian soldiers in their flight, they so disrupted both armies' battle lines that it is likely that the Carthaginian army was able to escape total encirclement due to them.

    upload_2019-2-7_13-40-49.jpeg

    Carthaginian Elephants Charge the Roman Center at Bagradas

    The Carthaginians lost almost all of their native cavalry, nearly 2,000 horsemen, in addition to the defection of 2,000 Numidian horsemen. 5,000 infantry were lost, as were a third of the 100 elephants. The Romans lost approximately 2500 men, though that was almost entirely negated by the addition of 2000 Numidians. Xanthippos made the most of his army's retreat and kept the army intact as it fled to Carthage, but there was no mistaking that this was a devastating loss. Not only had the Romans been able to defeat their army yet again, but now the Carthaginians had to face the prospect of invasion and raids from their Numidian neighbors.

    The Carthaginian Senate began to debate the terms that Regulus had offered them prior to the battle, and many began to favor accepting them. However, before a resolution could be agreed upon, a Roman envoy was dispatched to the Carthaginians to convey new terms. As they were read before the Carthaginian Senate, they steeled their nerves for what further humiliations the avaricious Roman general wished to bestow upon them. To their shock, however, Regulus's terms were actually more lenient than before:
    - The war indemnity was cut by one-third
    - The annual tribute was cut by one-third
    - Prisoners were to be exchanged on a one-for-one basis, and Carthage would only have to ransom whatever prisoners remained in Roman hands after this exchange
    - The Carthaginian navy was capped at 50 warships, rather than 1

    Regulus's motives were not likely born out of magnanimity, but likely due to his desire to wrap up the war himself, as his term was even closer to its close than it was when he last offered terms. If his successor landed in Africa and defeated even a single garrison, the glory would have to be shared between them. It also did not hurt that, in the wake of their victory, the Romans now held even more Carthaginian prisoners than before, allowing them to appear lenient with prisoner exchanges, even while they had a greater number of prisoners that the enemy was expected to ransom. Regulus also let it be known that whomever would lead the next Roman expedition would have even more time to ravage Carthage and exact even harsher terms than his original proposal, effectively portraying himself as an eminently reasonable and trustworthy negotiator, as opposed to any number of even more rapacious rivals that might be landing with the dawn of any given day.

    The Carthaginian Senate accepted his new terms after a short but acrimonious debate, and the Roman Senate duly ratified them themselves. Some in Rome pressed for harsher terms, knowing that they could inflict even more damage on Carthage if they continued to fight. This argument was defeated by those that argued that the more they fought Carthage, the poorer it would be and the less able it would be able to pay Rome the indemnities and tribute demanded - in short, Carthage should be shorn, not skinned. Further, many worried of the consequences of focusing so much of their attention to the south, when the Celts could come streaming down out of Cisalpine Gaul at any time.

    Thus ended the Punic War. Carthage and Rome had long been allies before the conflict, with a treaty between the two having been signed in the earliest days of the Republic, nearly three centuries prior, and the two states had considered cooperation against the invasion by Pyrrhus only a decade prior to the Punic War. Though a decade of war damaged relations between the two great cities greatly, many more sought to rekindle the ties that had bound them prior to the conflict. Rome's power had always lain within their ability to treat their defeated foes with honor and magnanimity, binding them to Rome's own interests, while Carthage's had lain with their mastery of trade. The two aims were far from mutually exclusive and the relationship between the cities would prove prosperous for both.

    Afterword

    Alright, everything up until Regulus managed to turn King Gala to the Roman side is historical. The terms he wanted to impose upon Carthage are the terms recorded by Dio. I have no idea if King Gala was really the ruler at this time, he was the father of Masinissa, who was born in 238 BC, so its possible. It doesn't really change the narrative that much, as all we need assume is that Regulus converted whomever the leader of the Numidian cavalry at the time was. That also seemed to be the most plausible way for Regulus to get the Carthaginians to surrender to something similar to his terms. As you can likely deduce, this is a very solid foundation for a Rome-wank: we've just butterflied the Second Punic War (not to mention half of the First and all of the Third Punic War), and all the chaos that came with it. Its also a decent foundation for a Carthage-wank.
     
    Last edited:
    The Barcid Revolt (250-248 BC)
  • The Barcid Revolt (250-248 BC)

    As the hostilities between Rome and Carthage ended and their fleets and armies returned home, Carthage was burdened with the additional cost of having to discharge its mercenary forces. They numbered nearly 20,000 at the end of the war, and Carthage had very nearly been crippled by the costs of the war. However, Carthage was not so destitute that they could not afford to pay their former army at all. The issue was how quickly to do so, and how much of their agreed upon payment should the mercenaries receive at once.

    Hanno, one of Carthage's leading generals, was tasked with the duty of discharging the mercenaries, and he worked with the contingents in as small numbers as he possibly could divide them, offering them reduced payments if they would accept now, arguing that the indemnity owed to Rome would slow Carthage's ability to pay them in full. They were welcome to sit in camp and wait for their full payment later, if they so wished. These negotiations started off well, and Hanno was gradually winnowing down the army to a less dangerous size. Always there was a risk that some of the mercenaries would violently refuse the new terms and take up their arms against Carthage, so Hanno proceeded carefully and as diplomatically as possible.

    Eventually, however, many of the mercenary bands grew disatisfied with Hanno’s handling of their discharges, and saw it, not unreasonably, as simply an attempt by the Carthaginians to welch on their contracted rates. These mercenaries, represented by one of their generals, a Gallic soldier named Autaritus, began to protest their treatment by Carthage and advocate strongly for their agreed upon contract rates. Nor were these dissident mercenaries without sympathizers among the Carthaginian elite, for not all felt that they should have agreed to Rome’s humiliating peace treaty. Such sentiment only grew now that Rome’s army had departed their homeland.

    This revanchist faction among the Carthaginians counted among their number one young officer by the name of Hamilcar Barca. Hamilcar was far from influential enough to be considered a leader of the faction, but he had already proven himself a skilled commander and had developed close ties with many of the mercenary commanders. He took up their cause before the Carthaginian state and advocated honoring their contracts, rather than haggling them downward after the fact. Far better, he argued, to pay in good faith the men that had fought for Carthage, than to pay the Romans that attacked their home.

    QS7Ze3S.jpg

    Bust of Hamilcar Barca

    His efforts did not go unrewarded, but the Carthaginian Senate only agreed to increase their starting offers, not to honor the full contracts immediately. They made a show of diverting some of their payments to Rome, to demonstrate the impossible situation they were in, but the mercenaries were hardly sympathetic. They largely accepted the better rate offered, and many looked to Hamilcar as their friend in Carthage, while the Romans took some note of this trouble-maker.

    Thus, Carthage avoided angering their former army too greatly, and secured a few years of peace. As they rebuilt after the war, however, the revanchist faction grew stronger, and Hamilcar’s star was in the ascent among those that sought to avenge their defeat. He was able to secure the support of several mercenary bands, and, in 250 BC, attempted to instigate a war with the nearby Numidians, hoping that doing so would force a conflict with Rome.

    In both regards, Hamilcar failed, as the Numidians did not attempt to counter his actions through military force, but by contacting the Carthaginian Senate itself. Hamilcar was ordered to present himself for judgement, but those that wanted him arrested and eliminated had underestimated his popularity with the people. Hamilcar’s associates in the city stirred up a series of revolts, and soon the city of Carthage was effectively embroiled in a civil war, not half a decade removed from their defeat at the hands of the Romans.

    The faction that had coalesced around Hamilcar Barca's instigations came to be known as the Barcids, as even though he was not the sole leader of that faction, he was by far the most notorious. He was able to bring many mercenaries to his side in the conflict, based on his reputation for dealing with them fairly, and many regarded his chance of victory favorably. Some even hoped that he would honor the back pay due to them after the Punic War, after his faction won. Though the Barcid forces were larger, the Carthaginian Senate was able to secure the city before Hamilcar could reach it, and though many of the mercenaries that Carthage relied upon for an army sided with Hamilcar, the walls were garrisoned and the navy remained loyal to the Senate.

    The Barcids laid siege to Carthage, largely waiting for sympathizers to enable them to bypass the defenses, but the opportunity did not arrive before Rome took an interest in the situation. Hamilcar was hopeful when he learned that the Romans were responding to his actions, certain that a Roman army on Carthaginian soil so soon after the recent war would stir up more resentment against Rome and the Senate that he considered to be their puppets. However, the Romans did not send an army, but they did send material support for the Senate, dispatching their own fleet and food and other supplies to the city, and even offered a gift of one year's worth of Carthage's annual tribute to the Senate.

    This support enabled the Carthaginian Senate to entice some of the mercenaries in the Barcid faction to defect and a few others to simply abandon the conflict entirely and look for other clients. Hamilcar still had a numerical advantage, but it had been greatly reduced, and the Senate had sought out the leadership of Xanthippos once more. Xanthippos was able to convert a portion of the remaining mercenaries in the Barcid camp, and the Barcids realized that their moment had passed. Other leaders began to defect back to the Senate's side, and soon, Hamilcar was the only rebel leader remaining defiant.

    Surrender was not an option for Hamilcar, as he had been declared an enemy of the state, and the only fate left for him was crucifixion. Still in command of enough of an army to be dangerous, Hamilcar surveyed his options. His ultimate course was to flee west with his army. Initially, he apparently considered taking some of the outlying Punic cities in North Africa and use those as bases of operations against the Senatorial forces. However, that was a losing proposition, all of his ambitions had required a quick victory before Carthage could be truly weakened by his revolt. All was not entirely lost, however, as one Carthaginian colony had defected to the Barcid faction. Ironically, it was the last outpost in Hispania that had remained loyal to Carthage, Gades (in Punic, Gadir).

    Gades was far from the center of Carthaginian power, but Hamilcar knew that Hispania was full of wealth waiting for those that would take it. He decided to relocate to Gades with his army and his companions, and hoped that, from there, he might carve out a destiny greater than the ignominious death that the Carthaginian Senate had in store for him. Some in the city thought it was best to hound him as he fled, but when it became known that his forces were fleeing all the way to distant Gades, the consensus was that it was best to allow him to flee into effective exile. Hispania was all but lost anyway, and was far from matters of import.

    So it was that Hamilcar arrived in Gades in 248 BC, and took control of the city. He established a government-in-exile of sorts, and decided that he would restore Carthaginian authority in Hispania, even if such authority would be entirely independent of - and hostile to - the actual Carthaginian government. Hamilcar was the undisputed leader of this rival government, though it retained the nominal republican forms of Carthage's own government.

    Afterword

    I really enjoy the idea that Carthaginian Spain, under the Barcids, was basically an independent kingdom, historically, that only paid nominal lip service to the idea that the Barcid forces were operating on behalf of the actual Carthaginian government. I've also been listening to the Revolutions' podcast series on the Mexican Revolution, and I thought it might be interesting if, after being humiliated by Rome, some Carthaginians might want to pull a Poncho Villa: instigate a war with an outside enemy, in order to get everyone in the homeland united against that enemy. It only sort of worked for Villa, and it totally backfires when Hamilcar tries it.

    This also ends up working out as a 'great sorting' of kinds for the Carthaginians. Those that hate Rome the most? They're in Gades. Those that are willing to work with the new status quo that has them as a client state of Rome? They're in Carthage. As for Rome supporting Carthage in their little civil war, this is basically what Rome did during the Mercenary War, historically. They continually rebuffed the rebels at every turn, released Carthagians without ransom, and generally tried to help Carthage out from the side lines - and then they changed their minds and took Sardinian and Corsica from Carthage just for the hell of it. Here, I figure Rome already has all the land they want from Carthage, and Carthage is a client state of theirs, so they'll be just a bit more pro-Carthage while it deals with an analogue to the Mercenary War.
     
    Last edited:
    Carthaginian Recovery (248-200 BC)
  • Carthaginian Recovery (248-200 BC)

    As the last of Hamilcar's supporters fled Carthaginian territory, those that remained took stock of their situation. The people of Carthage were not entirely at ease and peaceful, nor was the city's leadership, but things were generally quiet, and Carthage found that its new position was far from dire. True, they were now beholden to a foreign power in the Roman Republic, but Rome had completely eclipsed Syracuse, Carthage's natural and eternal rival. Syracuse had not been humbled quite as much as Carthage had, but it had been entirely hemmed in by Rome, while the Carthaginians found that the Romans were largely content with a policy of benign neglect; as long as Carthage honored their treaty obligations, the Romans didn't particularly care what else the Carthaginians did, as they were on the periphery of Roman interests.

    Jc6djxI.jpg

    Carthage's Harbor

    The Carthaginians went about, first and foremost, by rebuilding their merchant fleets, and taking advantage of the stability brought by the Roman victory. No longer did Carthaginian merchants have to fear conflict with Syracuse, and all of Italy was effectively open to them for trade. With the might of Rome behind their own banners, Carthaginian merchants found fewer and fewer Greek colonies that were unwelcome to them. They even called on the cities of Hispania that were being consolidated by the traitorous Barcids, but only for commercial reasons. Rome refused Carthage permission to carry the fight against Hamilcar to Hispania, and Carthage had to be content with the knowledge that, for the foreseeable future, the peninsula was lost to them, politically. Rome was no more a friend to Hamilcar than Carthage was, but many in Rome had grown distressed over how quickly Carthage had recovered and prospered after the war, and had no interest in allowing the Carthaginians to expand their territory through force of arms.

    It was not only trade that the Carthaginians turned to, in order to restore their honor, but also the land of North Africa itself. Though many of the elite had estates in the hinterlands of Carthage or the various dependent Punic colonies that dotted the coast from Libya to the Pillars of Hercules, their main interests had long been the control of the waves, rather than the development of the land. However, the Carthaginians found a new appreciation for their hinterlands after the war, and sought to settle them more thoroughly and bring more and more of the land into cultivation. In prior times, estates were often built or acquired in far flung regions, such as the Mediterranean islands. Now that Carthage had been shorn of its empire, all they had was the hinterland of North Africa. All manner of crops were grown, olives and wines, and grains of every kind. Even by the time of the Barcid revolt, the export of North African agricultural goods was key to even the Roman economy, and shipments of grain from Carthage were feeding Rome's armies as they pushed their northern frontier ever closer to the Alps.

    Beyond the hinterlands of Carthage and the other Punic cities of North Africa, the Numidian kingdoms still lay powerful and dangerous. King Gala set about securing his position after the Punic War, and made war on his rivals to the west with Rome's support. The Carthaginians were not particularly happy with the idea of a united and ascendent Numidia next door, and knew that the more powerful the Numidians were, the more they would have to cling to Rome for defense - or permission to defend themselves. They studiously maintained good relations with Gala, though, as they wished to avoid future hostilities. Gala himself was of a like mind, and fostered some of his children in Carthage as a sign of good faith. He was victorious in 237 BC, having spent nearly two decades conquering the rest of Numidia, but only reigned over a united kingdom for a year, before dying in early 235 BC. His heir, a boy named Masinissa, was only 3 years old, and Numidia broke apart completely at Gala's death, fracturing along its traditional lines. Masinissa was spirited away to live with his sisters in Carthage, where he spent his earliest years. By the age of 10, Masinissa would relocate to Rome, where he was maintained as a threat to the Numidians fighting over his father's legacy - Rome wanted the region quiet and prosperous. While they had preferred a united Numidia to check the growing prosperity of Carthage, the Roman Senate had almost as much of a vested interest in the stability of the region as Carthage had. Rome would eventually step in to stabilize Numidia themselves, after Masinissa came of age, but that was over a decade in the future.

    Many Carthaginians did not want to simply restore their honor, but also their glory. The city was prosperous enough to fund all manner of extravagances, including expeditions out beyond the Pillars of Hercules. Most followed the trade routes north, to Britannia, exploring the northern ocean as much as they dared, but others followed in the footsteps of Hanno the Navigator, sailing southward along the African coast. Though none at this time sailed as far as Hanno had, several trading outposts were re-established or re-enforced, repairing the edges of their trade network. One such outpost was on the islands off the coast of Africa known as the Canaria or Fortunate Islands. The islands were sparsely inhabited, but the climate was slightly more tolerable than that of the African mainland in the region, and the inhabitants were few enough that they were less of a threat than the mainlanders, who did not always trust the merchants from further away.

    On the Canaria Islands, some modest estates were established by the more adventurous among the Carthaginians, or those simply hoping to supply them with provisions. By 240 BC, it was noted that the livestock that the Carthaginians brought to these islands were quite healthy and prospered from the consumption of the leaves of a local tree, known by the Mauri natives as Tagasaste. Some enterprising merchants brought the seeds of this tree back to Carthage and the other large Punic cities, where it was cultivated in the pastures of various estates. It was a hardy tree that thrived in many soils that other plants did not, and had a restorative effect on the soil - though the Carthaginians could not know it at the time, the plant was an excellent nitrogen fixer.

    448px-Starr-050815-7363-Cytisus_palmensis-habit-Pohakuokala_Gulch-Maui_%2824683661202%29.jpg

    A Wild Tagasaste Tree

    The cultivation of Tagasaste across the Carthaginian estates enabled a massive increase in their herds, something which the Numidian, Mauri, and other pastoralist peoples took note of very quickly. Among the more aristocratic landowners, that had the time and inclination to record such matters, it was noted that marginal lands could expand their flocks and herds by fivefold or even tenfold, with proper cultivation. By the year 200 BC, the cities of North Africa - Carthage, most of all - were hubs of a booming trade in all manner of animal products. It was not only North African wine, olive oil, and grain that were flooding into the Mediterranean markets, but cheeses and woolen and leather goods of all kinds. In fact, the amount of wool produced was greater than the spinners in many cities could handle, drawing more and more workers into the cities to keep up with the supply. Carthage may have lost the war, but they were clearly winning the peace. Nor were the Romans - or even the Syracusans - the worse for the developments in North Africa. The increase of trade was enough that many of the ships plying the waters between North Africa were not just Carthaginian, but Greek and Italian, as well. Though the Tagasaste tree was best suited to the climate of North Africa, it was not solely used there, and many marginal lands elsewhere in the Mediterranean saw the plant begin to be grown on their dry and rugged lands.

    Afterword

    So, we get our first big 'technological' butterfly, in the wake of the economic development that more or less mirror what Carthage did, historically. A common theme among late Roman history is that North Africa was the economic linchpin of the Western Empire. Well, thats in no small part due to the defeated Carthaginians, after both Punic Wars, deciding that their homeland was actually pretty good for the production of a lot of stuff. Plus, even in our history, each Punic War tended to leave North Africa comparatively unscathed. Read the histories and notice that Rome was constantly annoyed that the Carthaginians were able to pay back their war indemnities and tributes so easily. I just gave them a nitrogen fixing fodder crop that will handle pretty much everything but consistent cold weather. And fodder crops, of course, are fed to livestock, who produce plenty of fertilizer that can be used for other plants. For the record, I have no idea if the name 'Tagasaste' really is native to the people of the Canary islands, but it is apparently a Berber word, so I'm just going to use it (plus, it is the name the plant is known by in modern times).

    I wasn't kidding when I said this was shaping up to be a bit of a Carthage-wank, too.
     
    Last edited:
    The Thunderbolt: The Reign of King Hamilcar I Barca (248-231 BC)
  • The Thunderbolt: The Reign of King Hamilcar I Barca (248-231 BC)

    When Hamilcar Barca arrived in Gades in 248 BC, it is unlikely that he had any true notion of the history he was about to make. Certainly, he was aware of his own influence and power, and that, with his army, he could shift the balance of power in Hispania firmly in whichever direction he so chose. However, there is little evidence that he sought to crown himself as a king at this time, whatever his later fate might be.

    In Hispania at that time was a patchwork of colonies, city states, small kingdoms, and tribal confederations. There were former Greek colonies along the norhteastern coast, and an array of Punic cities further sound down the coast, like Gades. Most had been subject to Carthage, but with their defeat by the Romans and the recent civil war, only a few still maintained even nominal allegiance to a city that could not even claim to be their mother city, but simply a more prosperous sister. Across the land lived the Celts, Iberians, Lusitanians, and many others, such as the remnants of the Tartessian civilization. While the ethnographers of antiquity preferred for all of these peoples to be isolated into orderly groupings, the truth of the matter is that there was likely much overlap between them, and few places in which one could identify with certainty where the line between them lay.

    Greek_and_Phoenician_Colonies_in_The_Iberian_Peninsula.png

    Hispania before Hamilcar I Barca

    Into this, stepped Hamilcar Barca and his army of mercenaries, loyal to him and to the wealth that they were confident he could use to pay them. Hispania was rich with mineral wealth, its mines legendary for centuries prior, the lands in the southern reaches of the peninsula well-cultivated, and the shores plied by merchants trading between the lands along the Mediterranean and those along the Atlantic. Few had any doubt, should Hamilcar be victorious in whatever his endeavors were, that he would be able to provide for his men.

    His first order of business was to send envoys to the various Punic cities along the coast, the former colonies of old Tyre, and offer them his protection - both from the tribes of the interior and from his own army. The cities were not great metropolises like Carthage and had neither the men nor the wealth to refuse Hamilcar's offer, and, one by one, they submitted to his protection. Most did so willingly, and those that were less willing did not take too long to change their minds as they found themselves in an increasingly small minority. Hamilcar organized the cities into something of a league (historians have dubbed it the Hispanic League, though that name is an anachronism), with each sending representatives to meet at an assembly in Gades. Though this assembly busied itself with many endeavors, keeping the great and powerful of the various cities occupied, it was not a free federation of equals. Rather, the league was a convenient fiction, not dissimilar to the Hellenic League that Philip II Argead, father of Alexander the Great, used to keep the fractious cities of Greece in line.

    From the base Hamilcar had established in Gades, he then moved against the more belligerent of the local tribes, securing victories against them throughout the years 246 and 245 BC. From this position of strength, he was able to treat with other kings and chieftains, as well as the various Greek cities that lay further along the coast. By this time, Hamilcar seems to have taken as his goal the general pacification of the more prosperous regions of Hispania, so that the fields and mines might be productive and the cities might benefit from trade of their output. This goal was quite prescient, for as the Carthaginian economy recovered after the end of the Punic War, their desire for specie grew commensurately. Indeed, as Hamilcar expanded his influence over more mining regions, he began to mint his own coins, modeled after the Carthaginian shekel.

    Dishekel_hispano-cartaginés-2.jpg

    Hispanic shekel depicting Hamilcar as Melqart Heracles

    The lands under Hamilcar's sway prospered, and he focused most of his attention not on the minutiae of governing, but on the expansion of his power. This provided an outlet for the energies of the assembly of cities in the Hispanic League, who busied themselves with legal and administrative matters. In fact, Hamilcar was so successful that when he sought to bring the Greek cities under his protection and into the league, the opposition was only half hearted, at most. There were battles, to be sure, and the city of Hemeroscopion actually forced Hamilcar to lay siege to the city for several months before surrendering, but the Greek cities of southern Hispania were all under his sway by the end of 241 BC.

    In that year, Hamilcar was acclaimed as king by his army and the assembly, with some titling him King of Hispania, though he preferred a far more cumbersome title, titling him as "King and Protector of the League of the cities of Gades, Malaka, etc." listing the cities in order of their ascension to his league. This simultaneously assuaged any of the kings and chieftains of Hispania that he had no pretensions of ruling over them, while also making his title seem more grand. Of course, he did have pretensions of ruling over them, but diplomacy has never been concerned with blunt honesty.

    As king, Hamilcar continued in his campaigns, ever pushing the extent of his influence further into the interior and along the coasts. While he was meeting with envoys and fighting battles, the cities and countryside were taking the first steps in forming an increasingly syncretic society, combining many features of Punic, Greek, and Iberian culture (inasmuch as there could be said to be a single Iberian culture). Even by the time Hamilcar was crowned, Greek was already something of a lingua franca in his lands, due in no small part to the preponderance of Greek speakers in his mercenary army. The army not only helped to spread a language across the land, but also was a key force in civilizing the locals by encouraging the adoption of a monetary economy - the soldiers were paid in the coins minted by Hamilcar, and as they marched around the land, their pay ended up in many different small towns and villages, stimulating the economic development of the land.

    To ensure that this continual supply of specie would remain flowing, Hamilcar's next target was the land of the Turdetani. They had control over several of the richest silver mines in the region, and proved to be the most intractable of all of the neighbors of the growing Barcid realm - no envoys or marriage alliances could sway them to come to his side. The Turdetani were one of the more urbanized societies, and posed a serious threat to Hamilcar's expansion, and he invaded their lands in 238 BC. The Turdetani called on the support of many of the more martial tribes of the interior, and were able to raise an army equal to Hamilcar's own under one of their kings, Indortes. This was the first existential threat to his growing empire, but Hamilcar was ultimately victorious outside the city of Hisbaal (Hispalis or Seville), along the river Baetis (Guadalquivir). Indortes was brought into Hamilcar's service, as a client ruler, and Hamilcar then proceeded to conquer the rest of the Turdetani. The war took an additional three years, and would see Indortes die around the time that he became less useful to Hamilcar - whether this was fortune or intrigue is unknown - leaving the lands of the Turdetani under much more direct Barcid control by 235 BC.

    The next target of Hamilcar's ambition were the Bastetani and Contestani. Both peoples were divided in their opposition to his expansion, with many local leaders having long been co-opted into the Barcid realm. Despite this, their conquest took longer than the Turdetani, with each opposing leader needing to be taken one by one, while the others who sought to stand against Hamilcar would raid the Punic lands. It was a brutal campaign, long and drawn out, the sort that students of logistics and maneuver love, and writers of grand narrative histories loathe. The largest battle had barely a fifth the combatants of the largest battle during the Turdetani campaign, and ambush and siege were the order of the day. The campaign was winding down, with only a handful of intransigent leaders left to oppose the invaders, when Hamilcar I Barca died, likely due to a camp disease, though some insist poison.

    He was succeeded by his son-in-law, Hasdrubal, acclaimed as king by the army and then accepted as such by the League's assembly. Hamilcar's career and life ended with a whimper, rather than a bang, but he utterly changed the trajectory of history in Hispania, like a thunderbolt on a clear day. Though there was still much work to be done, Hamilcar had successfully created the nucleus of a new state, with a new identity. Neither Iberian, Greek, or Punic, but a syncretic society, formed with some awkwardness, out of all those cultures. That was his legacy, and it would endure until greater forces overtook it.

    Afterword

    Took me longer than I wanted it to, but I really struggled with writing this, simply because I was, more or less, just paraphrasing actual history. There really isn't too much different between what happens in this entry and what Hamilcar actually did. The biggest difference is that he is acting on his own behalf, rather than as a general supporting Carthage itself. I tried to mix in some politics and statecraft along with the campaigning, and hopefully that was productive! I'll be moving on to more Roman-orientated entries soon enough.
     
    Last edited:
    Italy and Sicily After the Punic War (255-200 BC)
  • Italy and Sicily After the Punic War (255-200 BC)

    After the conclusion of the war with Carthage, the Roman Republic was as peaceful and prosperous as it ever was. All of Italy south of Cisalpine Gaul was under their control, along with the islands of Sicily, Corsica, and Sardinia. The great city of Carthage, the foremost of all the Phoenician cities in the Mediterranean, paid tribute to the Republic. With this swath of influence, the Romans effectively controlled the trade between east and west, as a bulwark separating the two halves of the sea. As they recovered from the long war with Carthage, few Romans doubted where their next priorities lay: Cisalpine Gaul and the Illyrian coastline. To the north, the Romans were wary of sharing an unprotected border with Celts, with the sack of Rome by Brennus less than a century and a half in their past. To the east, the piratical Illyrians preyed on Italian commerce, and as that became more synonymous with Roman commerce, the Senate could not abide that. During this period, while the government of the Roman Republic concerned itself with military campaigns to consolidate its position within the peninsula, the economy of Italy was developing rapidly under the stability brought by Rome.

    In Cisalpine Gaul, the region just south of the Alps, as the Etruscan civilization waned in the face of the successes of the Roman Republic, the land increasingly fell under the sway of various Celtic and related tribes. Of these, the most notable were the Boii, who hailed from far to the north of the Alps. Though the Romans would write that they invaded and maintained their more primitive ways of living even after settling in the fertile valley of the river Padus (Po), it is likely that they mingled with the remnants of Etruscan civilization. To the west of the Padus valley were the Ligurii, and to the east were the Veneti. Both groups were semi-Celtic in their cultures, but were regarded by most of their neighbors as distinct peoples.

    Gauls-and-Massaliotes-1024x477.png

    Greek traders in a Celtic village

    As the Romans looked to expand their influence in the region, they found that the Veneti were the most amenable to frienship with the Roman state, as they grew concerned with the power of tribes such as the Boii just beyond their lands. Lucius Caecillius Metellus, one of the Consuls for the year 250 BC was able to establish an alliance with the Veneti, and it was with this pretext that the Romans were able to consistently wage war against the Celtic tribes of Cisalpine Gaul. Though Metellus did lead soldiers in battle himself against the Boii, the conquest of the region was undertaken in a piecemeal fashion, with several Consular armies being sent into the region over a period well over a decade long. Roman interests were usually not entirely focused on the people of Cisalpine Gaul, leading to this half-hearted expansion into the territory. So long as the Legions were consistently winning, most of those in Rome did no feel any particular urgency in defeating the Celts decisively.

    That would change, indirectly, when the Republic was able to secure the alliance of the Ligurii, in 234 BC, under the leadership of Consul Titus Manlius Torquatus. Between the consistent victories of the Roman legions and their co-opting of the coastal peoples, the Celtic tribes gathered up a sizable army to push back the Romans, under the leadership of the Boii. This combined army was met by one commanded by the two Consuls of 232 BC, Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus and Marcus Junius Pera, north of the town of Faesulae. At this battle, the Roman forces were divided, as the Consuls did not expect to meet the Celts in that location. The Celts took the opportunity presented to them and attacked Pera's forces viciously, and were on the verge of utterly crushing that portion of the Roman army when Gracchus' legion was able to relieve them. In their eagerness, the Boii had overextended themselves and were now trapped between the two Roman armies. Though it was entirely accidental, the Romans had achieved a near perfect envelopment of the enemy, and they annihilated the Celtic army.

    In the aftermath, the various tribes quickly sued for peace with the Republic, and Rome now nominally held sway over all of Cisalpine Gaul. However, there was still one major challenge to their pacification of the region, and it lay in the form of the Gaesatae, a Celtic people from beyond the Alps who were drawn to the opportunity to subjugate their recently weakened brethren south of the Alps and plunder the land. This tribe was known for their ferocity and their tendency to fight in the nude, as a display of their bravery. When they crossed south in 229 BC, they were met with little resistance among the remnants of the Celts of the region and many of those who still had the will to fight sought to join the invaders, though the majority were said to have wanted nothing to do with the newcomers.

    Fighting-in-the-Buff.jpg

    Gaesatae warriors charging into battle

    Marcus Aemilius Lepidus was given command to confront the Gaesatae, and his army met them as they were attacking the settlement of Clastidium. Lepidus' army was almost 80,000 strong, while the Celtic force was over 60,000, but almost certainly well less than 70,000. While the Celts were outnumbered, they did have a superior cavalry component which could have decided the battle in their favor. However, as the Celts were divided by their attack on Clastidium, the Romans were able to bring superior numbers against them before the Celts could bring all their numbers to bear. By the time the entire Celtic army was engaged, much of it was exhausted and demoralized, and the Romans secured another victory. In the wake of this victory, and several smaller ones as they crushed the Gaesatae utterly, the Romans were harsh in their treatment to many of the Celtic tribes in Cisalpine Gaul, and not always perfectly in relation to which ones sided with the invaders. Much land was confiscated and many military colonies were established in the region, in order to more effectively pacify it and ensure that, even if future invaders chanced the Alpine passes, they'd find an unfriendly welcome.

    While the legions were securing the Roman frontiers to the north, the Republic was also determined to secure their eastern flank, the Adriatic Sea. There, various bands of Illyrian pirates were not respecting the might of Rome, and were continually preying on merchants that looked to the Roman state for protection. This could not be permitted, and Roman envoys were sent across the Adriatic to secure the sealanes from Illyrian warships. The Illyrian kingdoms were not quite as sophisticated or powerful as those of their Greek neighbors, and most such raiding was done by opportunistic individuals with galleys of their own, most popularly the liburnian style.

    003_liburna.jpg

    Liburnian Galley

    The most powerful king in Illyria was Agron, king of the Ardiaei, the Illyrian people who border Epirus directly to the north. Agron had expanded into Epirus and taken many of its northern and coastal territories, and the Roman Senate saw him as a useful potential ally, as they were uninterested in dealing with smaller kings that might not be able to deliver on any promises of safety. Rome also made sure that, while negotiating with Agron, they called upon the maritime levies that Carthage owed them - a request that the Carthaginians were all to happy to comply with, as the Punic merchants had little love for the institution of piracy. Backed up with the might of the Roman legions and the Carthaginian navy, the envoys to Agron had little difficulty in securing peace with the king in 242 BC and piracy within the Adriatic was greatly limited. The piracy was still greater than that which the coastal populations of Italy facing the Adriatic would have liked, but the Senate saw little way forward that did not greatly outweigh the effort. Further, the Senate hoped that, at some point, Agron's powerful kingdom would inspire enough fear in his still-piratical neighbors that they would beg Rome for protection and abandon piracy of their own free will, enabling the Republic to check this small but growing power.

    The peace with Agron and Roman plans to check his kingdom were undone, however, when, in 231 BC, he was murdered by an ambitious Greco-Illyrian commander named Demetrius, from the island of Pharos (Hvar). Demetrius intended to take over as ruler of the Ardiaei and installed himself as regent for Agron's son, Pinnes and married an Illyrian noblewoman, Triteuta, Agron's first queen. Agron had set Triteuta aside and acquired a new queen, named Teuta. Whether Triteuta was jealous and conspired with Demetrius against the younger queen, or was concerned for the safety of her son, Pinnes, or was simply a victim of the situation is unknown. What is known, however, is that Teuta fled the Ardiaei in fear for her life when Demetrius came into power, certain that she would be disposed of just as her husband had been.

    The obvious destination for Teuta was Rome, and there she went, ahead of assassins sent by Demetrius to kill her, and envoys sent by Demetrius to secure Roman support for his coup. The two sides argued their case before the Senate, with Demetrius casting the blame on Teuta for an attempt on Pinnes' life. In Demetrius' version, he stepped in the only way he could see to protect the heir to the throne and had no quarrel with Rome. Agron's death was a tragic accident, but Pinnes, under Demetrius' regency, would of course honor his father's obligations to the Roman Republic. Teuta was far less sophisticated in her rebuttal, and questioned what Roman honor meant if they would ever consider befriending a man who murdered a man who was called a friend of the Roman people. The Senate was divided, but Teuta's story managed to strike a chord with the population of Rome as a whole, with many seeing her as a tragic figure, Illyria's own Lucretia. The popular pressure was enough to tip Senatorial support for her cause, and Rome declared Demetrius' coup illegal and insisted that the interests of Agron's widow, Teuta, be protected. A few rounds of diplomatic exchanges crossed the Adriatic before war formally began in 230 BC.

    fa73efc741d1ec240689ce554e1f408f.jpg

    Teuta, Queen of the Ardiaei

    Demetrius seemed to have hoped that the time spent negotiating with the Romans would afford him time to secure allies and strengthen his position, but it also gave the Romans time to once more call up their naval resources from Carthage, so that when the war began, the Romans were quickly in complete control of the sea. Enough of the Italian allies could provide naval support to the Roman invasion that the Carthaginians were not strictly needed, but the Romans wanted their invasion to be a strong show of all the might that the Republic could call upon, in order to ensure that there would be no doubt when the war was won - victory was a forgone conclusion. Indeed, the Romans were quickly able to secure several Greek cities that were under the control of the Ardiaei, most notably Corcyra (Corfu), off the coast of Epirus, one of Agron's conquests.

    Demetrius' forces met the Romans outside the city of Epidamnos (Durrës), hoping to prevent the Romans from securing access to the Illyrian mainland through the city's harbor. The Romans were victorious, even as they could not bring the entirety of their army to bear against the Illyrians, as Demetrius attacked while they were still disembarking. However, Demetrius also could not bring all of his forces to bear on the Romans, as combined Italian and Carthaginian naval force attached to the battle had quickly driven off their Illyrian counterparts, and their marines were attacking the city. Demetrius was thus forced to divide his forces while the Romans were able to land relatively unmolested. After securing the city (and renaming it Dyrrachium), the Romans then marched north to the capital of the Ardiaei, Scodra (Shkodër), and laid siege to it. It was not a particularly long siege, and before the city fell, Demetrius fled to Greece, where he faded into obscurity, likely as a mercenary commander.

    The Roman Republic was victorious in this short war in 229 BC, and they then divided up the lands of the Ardiaei. The independence of Corcyra was restored, as a Roman ally (bound to provide naval support and patrol the Adriatic for piracy), while the lands of the Ardiaei themselves were divided in two. Pinnes, under a regency led by his mother, Triteuta, was allowed to rule in the northern reaches of their lands, while Teuta was offered the southern territories. However, she had decided that she preferred life in Rome and ultimately married one Titus Livius, a prominent plebeian politician. In her place, an Illyrian commander named Scerdilaidas was placed on the throne, and a relative peace was established. Pressure was continually placed on the rest of the Illyrian coast, and the Romans utilized their strong position on either side of the Adriatic to bring the lesser Illyrian tribes under their influence, which continued over the coming years without much difficulty. Armies were occasionally dispatched, though this was often just as much a matter of demonstrating the might of Rome (and giving magistrates the opportunity for some glory) rather than a proportional response to the danger represented by any of the tribes. By 200 BC, the Adriatic was without a doubt peaceful and free for commerce.

    It was quite fortunate that the troubles with pirates in the region were being resolved, as Italy was growing increasingly prosperous, and the number of merchant vessels plying the waves seemed to increase every year. The rapid growth in North Africa was not isolated to that land, and as increasing numbers of merchants between Africa and Italy traded more after the Punic War, much of that prosperity began to emerge in Italy, as well. The new agricultural developments with the use of fodder such as the tagasaste plant found their place in much of Italy, particularly the southern regions, and, though Italy was not quite as suitable an environment for the crop as Africa, it did provide a welcomed boost to the many estates that dotted the countryside, and Italian cities were soon awash in wool, just as the African cities were.

    During this time, there was so much wool in the markets that spinners could hardly keep up with the supply. At some point, the oversupply was so much that some ingenious tinkerer was able to come up with a solution. Supposedly, it was Archimedes himself, working on behalf of the king of Syracuse, who was concerned over the decline in revenues coming from the wool industry. However, it was just as likely to be some unknown artisan, who happened to live in Sicily, and since he was a contemporary of Archimedes, the claim went to the more famous man. Whomever the credit is due to, the invention was just what was needed. It was a wheel on which wool could be spun, and could do the work of ten spinners. Now, the demand for wool could easily keep pace with the supply, and it was ultimately cloth, not wool, that became inexpensive. The cities of Italy, Sicily, and North Africa, were soon producing much more cloth than they ever had before.

    Spinning-wheel.png

    Spinning Wheel

    As the 2nd century BC dawned, the urban civilization of the Western Mediterranean was still far less wealthy than their eastern counterparts under the rule of the Hellenistic successors to Alexander, but they were advancing rapidly. Cities and farms were prospering, and trade was flourishing. The advances made in the west would not remain there, and estates in Greece, Anatolia, and Syria would all see similar growth, and it is no surprise that the spinning wheel, invented in the very Greek Syracuse, would spread to the other Greek cities. The less civilized and settled regions of the Mediterranean and Europe beyond would be slower to adopt the new technology, but they would still benefit, as they could raise flocks for wool just as well as Punic, Berber, Italian, and Greek herdsmen. Many of the Celtic lands beyond the Mediterranean were well suited to pastoral pursuits, and if the Celts did not have the wherewithal to spin wool, they certainly could sell it to their southern neighbors who did.

    Afterword

    Long delayed, but the conquest of Cisalpine Gaul was boring to write, even when I tried to tweak history a bit to be recognizable but different. The Illyrian War was more fun, since it was a war driven by personalities, and Teuta is marginally famous (even if only due to Crusader Kings 2). Ultimately, I just had to get the wars out of the way so I could focus on my love of economic history and the spinning wheel. Introducing Tagasaste to the Mediterranean crop package was nice and all, but it was just an excuse for me to justify someone inventing the spinning wheel 700 to 1000 years early. This is the game changer, the humble spinning wheel that birthed so much more of modern technology than rarely appreciate (unless we're fans of James Burke). I'm very eager to give the Hellenistic world a crack at what you can do with a bunch of excess cloth lying around. I wonder what the Medievals did with it?
     
    Last edited:
    The Hegemony of Ptolemaic Egypt and Ascent of Bactria (246 BC- 201 BC)
  • The Hegemony of Ptolemaic Egypt and Ascent of Bactria (246 BC- 201 BC)

    Ever since the death of Alexander the Great, the dynasties that formed in the wake of his conquests battled furiously with each other for supremacy. While the two greatest of these dynasties were the Ptolemaic dynasty in Egypt and the Seleucid dynasty in Babylon, a general balance of power had settled across the eastern Mediterranean, as no single monarch could achieve supremacy, as the others would rally against any that proved too mighty. The constant warfare did seem to ebb when those two powerful dynasties established a peace treaty in 253 BC, with the daughter of King Ptolemy II Philadelphus of Egypt, Berenice Phernophorus, married to the Seleucid King, Antiochus II Theos, becoming his queen after he set his previous queen, Laodice, aside. There were few suggestions that such a marriage could form a long-lasting alliance, as the two kingdoms were natural rivals, but few could have predicted that the marriage itself would so quickly trigger a war between them.

    022e54c039e9827c164c3ab55119e33a.jpg

    Hellenistic World, c. 250 BC

    In 246 BC, Ptolemy II died and was succeeded by his own son, Ptolemy III Euergetes. When news of this death reached Antiochus II, he immediately repudiated his marriage to Berenice and returned to his first queen, Laodice. The rejected queen and her twin children, a boy named Antiochus and a daughter named Arsinoe, might not have been in danger immediately, despite the political fall from grace, but Antiochus himself died shortly after rejoining Laodice in Ephesus. The restored queen quickly gathered support for her own sons, Seleucus and Antiochus to succeed him as co-rulers, rather than the infant Antiochus by Berenice. Of course, as in any monarchy, there was little enthusiasm at the prospect of a child monarch, so most of the aristocracy supported Laodice, and conspirators in Antioch soon moved against Berenice and her children. The unwanted branch of the royal family came very close to being murdered, but loyal retainers were able to spirit them out of Antioch and ultimately onto a ship, bound for Alexandria. Though the great phalanxes had yet to gather, the Third Syrian War, also known as the Laodicean War, had begun.

    822px-Ptolomeo_III.JPG

    Bust of Ptolemy III Euergetes

    Both realms fought almost entirely with mercenary armies composed primarily of Greek Phalangites. Neither the Seleucids or Ptolemies had any interest in conscripting the natives of the lands they ruled, as military service was, as in all ages, ultimately synonymous with power. However, in most other respects, the two kingdoms were very different. The Seleucids ultimately ruled a cosmopolitan empire, not so different than the Achaemenids before them, and their territory stretched from Asia minor to the Himalayas. The Ptolemies, on the other hand, ruled Egypt from their capital at Alexandria, and projected power out into the Mediterranean from that capital. In many ways, they were the rulers of a great city-state that could hold power over the Nile Valley through force of arms and the sponsorship of the Egyptian religion.

    2880px-Asia_Minor_in_the_Greco-Roman_period_-_general_map_-_regions_and_main_settlements.jpg

    Hellenistic Anatolia

    Though the two sides were relatively evenly matched, the Ptolemaic armies quickly gained the upper hand in the fighting. Ptolemy III had placed his armies under the command of Xanthippus of Sparta - the very same general who had fought and lost against the Romans for Carthage. Seleucus, on the other hand, had to share control with his brother, Antiochus, and the two struggled to cooperate. While the co-rulers squabbled, the Ptolemaic armies were able to seize Antioch and the surrounding regions of Syria, and they then marched on Babylon itself before the year had ended. While Ptolemy occupied the ancient capital, he crowned his nephew Antiochus as king of Babylon, conveniently shearing off the Mediterranean reaches of the Seleucid Empire from the kingdom he promised his nephew.

    At this time, Anatolia was as fragmented as any region could be, though the Seleucids still were the most powerful force in the region. Seleucus attempted to win over allies in the region, but he was betrayed by his own brother, who decided that he preferred sole rule of Anatolia to co-rule of a larger empire with his brother. Antiochus was now the Seleucid monarch that other rulers treated with, and he brought together many allies, threatened by the successes of the Ptolemies. Pontus, Bythinia, Armenia, and Macedon allied themselves with Antiochus - though Antigonus II Gonatus of Macedon had already joined in the war on the Seleucid side, he simply began to fight alongside Antiochus. Ptolemy was not without his own allies in Anatolia, and chief among them were Pergamon and Rhodes, as well as the recently arrived Galatians.

    While the fighting dragged out in Anatolia, Seleucus strove to regain his capital and push back into Syria. While he gathered his forces to do so, his eastern territories began to slip away in 244 BC, as Diodotus, the satrap of Bactria, declared himself king, while Andragoras, satrap of Parthia, did likewise. It seemed that the Seleucid Empire was completely dissolving around the unfortunate ruler, and indeed, it truly was. Seleucus maintained control of the Persian heartland, but after facing defeat while trying to retake Babylon in 242 BC, he bowed to the reality of the situation before him and made peace with Ptolemy. His treacherous brother fared less favorably, and Antiochus was killed in his sleep the following year, the war still dragging on in Anatolia.

    Ptolemaic Egypt was the greatest victor of the war, gaining all of Syria to its direct rule. Babylon was ruled by the young nephew of Ptolemy III. Ptolemaic allies in Anatolia expanded their territories, with Pergamon securing its surrounding lands and Rhodes expanding onto the mainland itself. Macedon had managed to push Ptolemaic power entirely out of the Aegean, but gained little else. Persia and the lands to the east were the least touched by the war, but they would see their own battles soon enough.

    Ptolemy III was supreme in the eastern Mediterranean, but he was not invincible. During the war, the Nile was not flooding as it usually did, causing severe economic hardship in the heartland of his empire. Though none at the time could have understood it, the lack of flooding was possibly due to severe volcanic eruptions elsewhere in the world, disrupting the rainfall in the headwaters of the Nile. These conditions had already begun early in the war, and had Seleucus and Antiochus been able to coordinate their opposition to Ptolemy, they likely would have been able to recover the majority of their losses.

    As it was, Ptolemaic control was largely limited to the gains in the first year of the war. This still resulted in a vastly expanded domain, and Ptolemy made great use of this by importing grain to Egypt from the other regions in his domain - particularly his new Babylonian vassal - during the famines that followed. Further military expansion was impossible at the time, as the military was primarily focused on maintaining control within the Nile valley. If any of the neighboring powers had been in better condition to contest the Ptolemaic expansion, it is likely that their territorial gains would have lost in the following years.

    Ptolemy’s rival, Seleucus, was faring far worse. Shorn of the agricultural heartland of Mesopotamia, his kingdom was contained to Persia itself, and he faced serious threats on many fronts. With the loss of Bactria and Parthia, his northeastern frontier was insecure, and the following years were spent securing his hold on his remaining territories. Andragoras, the rebellious satrap of Parthia suffered when the Parni, one of the steppe tribes of the Dahae confederation, invaded his lands in 237 BC. The Parni, under their leader Arsaces, conquered the rest of Parthia over the next few years, with Andragoras dying at some unknown point in the period. The Parni continued their expansion against both Persia and Bactria, until Seleucus secured a victory against them in 231 BC and was able to sign a peace with them, hoping that he might use their cavalry as mercenaries against his other foes. This left only the Bactrians, under Diodotus’ son, who styled himself Diodotus II.

    Diodotus II faced considerable challenges in holding back the Parni, and almost the entire resources of his kingdom were dedicated to recruiting mercenaries from across the Hellenistic world to hold his territory. It would be to one of commanders that Diodotus would fall, rather than the Parni. The Hellenistic kingdoms were prone to coups, especially the younger ones that lacked institutional legitimacy or a history of victories. Diodotus had neither, and when a young mercenary commander named Demetrius started to secure a string of victories against the Parni, the king’s position was very insecure.

    900px-Hellenistic_ruler_BM_Sc1861.jpg

    Bust of Demetrius I Soter

    Demetrius was born sometime around 255 BC, in Anatolia, and had first fought in the Syrian War (fighting under Xanthippus), before heading further east as the company in which he was employed was hired by first Seleucus and ultimately, Diodotus. This provided the young man with plenty of experience against the Parni, and he rose quickly through the ranks. While in service to the Bactrian king, he began to lay out his own plans for a revolution in military warfare. He was every much the student of Philip and Alexander as any Hellenistic officer, and saw an opportunity to further develop their combined arms tactics. To do so, he needed a secure supply of steppe archers to rival the Parni, and found them in one of their rival Dahae tribes, the Pissuri. Demetrius would actually go on to marry the daughter of a leading Pissuri chief, Arsaces (not to be confused with the Parni ruler, Arsaces, who was styling himself king of Parthia by this time).

    Rather than use the Hellenistic Phalanx as a tool with which to pin down an enemy army, as Philip and Alexander did, Demetrius would use the heavy infantry as a mobile fortification, able to secure key points on the battlefield and deny them to enemy. Meanwhile, the steppe cavalry would bring the battle to their opponent, with the archers disrupting their formations or wearing them down with continual volleys, while the heavier cavalry would follow through against any weak points. The key to the overall battle plan was continual but cautious offense. When Demetrius was in a position to use these tactics against the Parni, they were eminently successful, and the young commander was able to secure Bactria from the invaders, with peace being established in 225 BC. Just in time for the Parthian kingdom to invade Seleucid Persia upon the death of Seleucus, who was succeeded by his son Alexander, who took the name Seleucus for himself, reigning as Seleucus III.

    In the same year, Diodotus was overthrown in a coup as Demetrius took control of Bactria, styling himself king, with the support of the army he had built. There were enough Greco-Macedonian cities in Bactria that he could recruit his infantry primarily locally, which was essential for him as the Parni of Parthia would defeat the remains of the Seleucid Empire in Persia by 220 BC, the year in which Arsaces’ brother, Tiridates, defeated and killed Seleucus III in battle. Bactria was effectively cut off from the rest of the Hellenistic world, but that mattered little to Demetrius. In Bactria, he was building upon Alexander the Great’s dream of a fusion of cultures, combining the urbanized and infantry-focused Greek traditions with the nomadic cavalry tradition of the steppe. He spent almost as much time focusing on the integration of Pissuri and Greek leaders, sponsoring marriages between the two groups, as he did campaigning against his enemies.

    Demetrius did more than simply follow in Alexander’s footsteps in approach to culture and innovative tactics, and claimed to be a descendent of the great conqueror himself. Officially, Demetrius’ pedigree was that Alexander IV, his son, was secretly married to a princess in Anatolia (supposedly an Achaemind) shortly before his untimely death, and she bore him a son posthumously. This boy, Amyntas, was Demetrius’ grandfather. The genealogy was very unlikely, not only because there was no record of it whatsoever prior to Demetrius’ proclamations, but also because of the extreme youth of Alexander IV at the time of his death, no older than 14. However, it was not strictly impossible, and the claim of descent from Roxana bolstered Demetrius’ reputation in Bactria itself.

    Demetrius would go on to campaign vigorously, claiming that he was restoring the Argead Dynasty to its rightful place as the only true heirs to Alexander’s legacy, and his continual victories were enough to convince many contemporaries that perhaps his supposed lineage was true. In the end, it was no less probable than the many kings declared to be the children of gods or gods themselves. His victories included conquering Sogdiana by 221 BC from a rival named Heliocles, Arachosia and Gandhara from the floundering Mauryans in 215 BC, and then Ferghana and Chorasmia in 211 BC. His approach was almost entirely opposite that of his claimed ancestor, as Demetrius campaigned in a fashion similar to how he fought his battles: he wished to wear out his enemies while exposing his own army to as little risk as possible. While some of his men may have wanted greater glory, few could argue with the results and the fact that they consistently could return to their homes and families. The rest of his campaigns were largely focused against the Parthians, gradually pushing their borders ever westward every campaign season.

    2880px-Achaemenid_Empire_En.svg.png

    Achaemenid Empire (for reference)

    Demetrius would die peacefully in 201 BC after securing Hyrcania from the Parthians and historians would refer to him as Demetrius I Soter of the Bactrian Empire. His eldest son, Alexander V, would succeed him at the age of 24, only 4 years older than Alexander the Great had been when he succeeded Philip II. The empire he inherited stretched from the Caspian Gates in the west to the Jaxartes river in the north, the headwaters of the Indus in the east and the Gedrosian desert in the south. In the court at Bactra (the capital of Bactria) and the neighboring courts, there was wonder as to whether this young king would surpass his father, as his namesake had surpassed his own.

    MacedonEmpire.jpg

    Campaigns of Alexander the Great (for reference)

    Afterword

    The Third Syrian War that I've chronicled here is pretty similar to history, except that I take it as an opportunity to totally screw over the Seleucids by giving Ptolemy a solid chance to prop up his nephew in Babylon. Which was really just an excuse for me to pump up Bactria (and, also, to play around with the Eastern Mediterranean political scene a bit).

    I had this vision of a Hellenistic commander using Byzantine-era field army tactics, with Parthian horse archers replacing Cataphracts. It sounded like a natural progression from the Phalangite-Companion Cavalry combination that Philip and Alexander used to such effect, so I ran with it. And I couldn't help but have a little bit of fun by making the usurper a secret descendent of Alexander, because why not? All these Hellenistic kings go around being proclaimed gods, and nobody ever said "Nah, I'm not a god, I'm just the secret true blood heir to Alexander the Great." Sure, most of the big name dynasties couldn't do that, but there were enough usurpers kicking around in those centuries. I'll leave it to all of you to pick your own personal head canon as to whether Demetrius has it right, or is just bolstering his legitimacy.
     
    Bactrian Syncretism under Alexander V Aniketos (201-171 BC)
  • Bactrian Syncretism under Alexander V Aniketos

    When Demetrius, king of Bactria, died in 201 BC, his young son, Alexander, ascended to the throne. The succession was fairly orderly, and only involved the elimination of a small cadre of courtiers and officers that presented a potential threat to his ascension. Alexander was relatively untested at the time, and the first to challenge the new king were the Parthians. The burgeoning empire in Persia, built off the collapsing remains of the Seleucid dynasty, knew that the conquests of Demetrius had jeopardized their own aspirations and they saw the potential to destabilize the Bactrians and secure eastern Persia under their own rule.

    Alexander, however, proved to be up to the challenge presented by his neighbors to the west, and met the Parthian challenge head on. Though Alexander was not the brilliant commander that Alexander the Great - his claimed ancestor - clearly had been, he was able to secure a series of modest victories against Arsaces II as the Parthians were first pushed out of Bactrian territory, and then into Parthian territory. Though none of these battles were decisive on the battlefield themselves, Alexander secured the ultimate political coup when his forces captured Arsaces after their final battle. The Parthian army had continually eluded the young king’s attempts to destroy them, but capturing their own king enabled Alexander to grant clemency in return for fealty. The two kings were almost kin, with both men representing the syncretization of the nomadic Dahae people, Alexander being half Greek and half Pissuri, and Arsaces being a relatively Persianized Parni. With the vassalage of the Parthian Kingdom, Alexander nominally now ruled all of Persia east of Mesopotamia, a vast realm in its own right.

    He did not, however, wish to wage war against the Ptolemaic client, the rump Seleucid state in Mesopotamia and considered Egypt too strong a foe at this juncture to challenge. Though the allure of conquering the rest of Alexander the Great‘s Empire in the opposite direction had some poetic appeal, this new Alexander saw fit to expand in other directions. To this end, he opened up relations with Ptolemy V Epiphanes and negotiated a formal peace treaty that was concluded by the marriage of Ptolemy to Alexander’s sister, Olympias in 198 BC. This dynastic tie was particularly important to Alexander because it was a tacit admission by the Ptolemaic dynasty that the pretensions of he and his father to be direct descendants of Alexander the Great were, in fact, true. Those claims would eventually be embraced more explicitly by Ptolemy’s son, who would eventually reign as Ptolemy VI.

    While Alexander was negotiating the marriage of his sister to his western neighbor, he also found himself a bride, marrying a Maurya princess, Charumati, though the histories are conflicted as to which Maurya Emperor was her father. Alexander took great pride in the fact that he could trace his ancestry to two of history’s greatest conquerors. More importantly to the rest of Bactria, this marriage helped to facilitate further trade between India and Bactria - and thus, the rest of the Hellenistic world. Alexander would also command his armies in battle in the Indus and Gangetic plains as an ally to the Maurya Emperors, four of whom would reign as his contemporaries. The Maurya Empire was entering a period of gradual decline, and their alliance with the powerful military that Alexander commanded did enable the Maurya Emperors to win back many cities that had slipped from their grasp.

    Alexander did not campaign in India solely to build good will among a faltering but powerful empire, but also to learn more of the ways of that vast rich land and follow his father’s general principle of combining the strengths of as many different peoples as he could. To that end, he studied India methods of warfare as well as Indian philosophy, science, and religion, while inviting many Indian scholars to his capital at Bactra. Though the history of philosophy owes him a debt for fostering closer ties between two disparate philosophical traditions, Alexander found one military innovation much more interesting: the toe stirrup. Though useful for the barefoot cavalry of the hot subcontinent, the Bactrians saw further potential if the device were adapted for more mild climes.

    Historians debate just how crucial the stirrup was to warfare, and whether it improved the fighting ability of an individual cavalryman. One thing is certain, that it made the training of cavalry much easier, thus allowing generals to field larger cavalry armies and train them quicker. As adapted by Alexander’s Bactrians, the stirrup was possibly a flat platform open to the outside, though it is also possible that a leather strap enclosed the foot. Whatever the case may be, it is clear that, under Alexander, the Bactrian cavalry began incorporating the new technology en masse and it enabled him to make the army much more flexible. First, he was able to increase the proportion of cavalry in any given campaign. Second, he was able to require his infantry to spend some time training as cavalry, allowing him to make even more use of his men and horses, as available. In many battles, Alexander could draw on reserves from among his infantry, mounting spare horses to unexpectedly attack the enemy.

    As Alexander honed his abilities, he began to campaign to the north of Bactria, conquering all the lands between the Caspian and Aral seas And securing more steppe regions for Bactria. This largely involved scoring victories over the steppe peoples and then negotiating various alliances with these populations and folding large numbers of their own cavalry into his army. With each victory, he established Greco-Bactrian colonies in whatever settlements existed, to further secure the allegiance of these regions. Alexander wished to further push his control to the northeast, into the Tarim basin, but events in India would pull his attention southward.

    In 187 BC, the last Maurya Emperor was deposed in a coup by one of his generals, Brahmamitra Shunga, establishing the Shunga dynasty out of Pataliputra. Alexander and the Bactrians had good relations with many Maurya vassals and cities, and his queen was a devout Buddhist herself. So, when the new Shunga Emperor began to take steps to curb the influence of Buddhism in his new realm, Alexander seized the opportunity to invade the Indian subcontinent and claim many of the riches of the lands of the Indus for Bactria.

    The potent combination of steppe horse archers, the Macedonian phalanx, and Greek siegecraft enabled Alexander to sweep through the Indus like a lightning bolt, coming down from the mountains to seize city after city. Many did not just surrender without a fight but actively invited Alexander’s armies into their walls. Alexander and queen Charumati would conduct many lavish parades to win over the hearts of those cities and rulers that embraced the invasion (or, to read Bactrian accounts, liberation). The Shungas were not without their own might, and though Alexander had reached as far as Mathura by 183 BC, he did not go any further east. Accounts differ as to whether Alexander wanted to conquer the Gangetic plain, the core of the new Shunga empire, and was dissuaded from doing so by the size of the Shunga armies, or whether he did not want to over-extend his own conquests. The most cynical interpretation is somewhere in between, that Alexander simply did not want to risk tarnishing his record of being undefeated in battle, even if his army was up to the task.

    Whatever the case may be, the two realms skirmished for several years, before a formal peace was established between Alexander and Brahmamitra, with both acknowledging the other as equal Emperors - though Alexander used the formulation of King of Kings himself. Though Alexander was no Buddhist himself - as a typical Hellenistic ruler, he indulged in many local cults and spent more time engaging in the philosphical flourishing of the Hellenistic world - he was seen as a patron of the Buddhists of the Indus valley, and many who still lived under the Shungas came to live under his rule. Alexander encouraged many Buddhist artisans to settle across his empire and they brought their faith with them. Though they would mostly fade into the general cosmopolitan cities of the more settled regions, such as Persia, these Buddhists did leave quite a cultural mark upon the steppe.

    Alexander’s next opportunity for expansion came when, far to the east of his empire, a great convulsion among the steppe nations took place. In the east, the steppe had been ruled by a great Kushan (Yuezhi) tribal confederation, which had maintained friendly relations with the peoples of China. However, in 178 BC, they were resoundingly defeated by the Huns (Xiongnu) who supplanted them as the pre-eminent steppe confederation of the east. As such steppe revolutions tended to do, this resulted in a great flight of the defeated peoples away from their conquerors, and this meant that the Kushans began to stream directly into the Tarim basin, pushing the nomadic Saka people into Bactrian territory. Alexander‘s policy regarding the new arrivals was to offer them refuge in return to military service, or face his battle-proven army. Initially, most of the steppe warriors were willing to test the mettle of the Bactrians, but after a string of modest victories by Alexander, and one battle in which he utterly destroyed the invading army, most accepted his offer.

    The Saka, as an Iranian people, were relatively easily folded into Alexander’s army, which was almost half Iranian, particularly the cavalry. With the Saka allied to him, Alexander now had an excellent pretext to invade the Tarim basin, which he did in 174 BC. The region was already being fought over as the Kushans were still establishing themselves in the region, fighting the remaining Saka while also fending off further attacks from the Huns. All the while, the people of the oasis cities had to try to side with whomever looked strongest in the moment. This unstable realm proved fertile ground for the organized armies of Alexander, and he again treated generously with the cities as he had in India. His own cavalry armies proved to be quite up to the task of securing the surrounding areas of any city that opened their gates to him, and this enabled Alexander to maintain steady lines of communication and supply for his army, which would otherwise have been too large for the region to support. By fielding such a large army, Alexander could thus simply outnumber any opposing army, be it Kushan or Hun.

    Just as Alexander used diplomacy to win over the cities, he also used it to negotiate with the Huns, who were the further threat. He reasoned that the Huns would prefer to defeat the Kushans with Bactrian support, rather than fight both peoples. This diplomatic overture paid great dividends, as Alexander could pick off whichever Kushans opposed his conquest of the region, while offering generous terms to those that accepted his suzerainty, which most did. Within two years, the entirety of the Tarim basin was under Bactrian rule, and Alexander could take great pride in having conquered further to the east than his namesake ever had. The conquest also enabled Alexander to open up formal relations with the empire that now bordered his lands, China.

    At this time, the Han ruled over China under the benevolent and wise ruler, Emperor Wen. Though the Chinese army was quite formidable, they were far more concerned with the Huns to their north, who had defeated the traditional Han allies, the Kushans. Bactria was a mighty empire, but it was in no position to invade a united and prosperous China. Alexander was also quite content to rest on his laurels after decades of intermittent war, and so envoys were exchanged and trade was opened between Bactria and China. In particular, the Chinese were quite fond of the Bactrian horses, which fetched astounding prices. In the opposite direction, Chinese silk and iron were prized. This blossoming of trade further stabilized Alexander’s rule, as both steppe peoples and city dwellers prospered from the exchanges.

    Alexander himself would live until 168 BC, having ruled for over three decades, earning himself the sobriquet of Aniketos (Invincible). Though he was undefeated in battle and his campaigns took him from western Persia to the headwaters of the Ganges to the borders of China, Alexander actually spent most of his reign in non-military pursuits, building alliances with his neighbors, fostering trade between the disparate regions of his empire, and encouraging large scale settlement in the many cosmopolitan Bactrian cities. In any city of size, Greek, Persian, and Sanskrit could be heard spoken, alongside any number of local languages. Greek was the official language of court and coinage, but Alexander was fluent in all three of the major languages of his empire and expected his officials and courtiers to be at least conversant in the three.

    When Alexander died, he would pass the throne to his second eldest son, Menander, after the eldest, Philip, had predeceased Alexander in 171 BC, and his own son, also an Alexander, was under 5 years of age. Menander himself was a devotee of Buddhism, and would do much to facilitate its spread across Bactria and neighboring lands.

    Afterword

    In keeping with the general economic focus of this timeline, the main areas that should interest us are the diffusion of the stirrup earlier, the opening of the Silk Road earlier, and the general melting pot of cultures provided by Bactria. In particular, I’m quite eager to get Greek and Indian mathematicians working together, so that we can get various developments in that field earlier than historically. Also, please note that I am using Kushan as a term for all of the Yuezhi out of convenience. I wanted to call them Tocharians, but that would be an anachronistic term to use for them, and everything else that would be reasonable for Greeks to call them was too obscure. Similarly, while the debate about the Xiongnu and Huns is far from settled, it is a useful enough term for a Greco-Roman perspective (though I suppose if I really wanted to engage in this conceit, I should refer to them as Ounnoi).

    PS, remind me to add some maps and artwork when I get back to my computer.
     
    Last edited:
    Top