Sociopolitical and Cultural progress had Carthage won

[Historico]

The Idea of this thread was really co-opted from General Zod's thread over a surviving Roman Empire that was posted a few months ago. Over the past few weeks, I have found a renewed interest in Punic Civilization and Dominance of the Meditteranean over the past few weeks, and I wonder what would be the effects Sociopoliticaly and Culture had Hannibal Barca been successful in razing Rome to the ground in 207 BCE. Assume that the POD, is that Hadsrubal was able to sneek past Gauis Claudius Nero, to give his brother the necessary reinforcements to march south towards Rome. After an extended seige period(Anywhere from 6 months to a Year), The Gates of Rome finally give way, Any man that could be found are slaughtered, Women/Children are sold into Slavery, and the City is razed to the ground as Hannibal had promised his father with the ground salted.

Ok, Getting Hannibal to destroy Rome although not easy as some of the threads would have had it but it is extremley plausible that he could have done it. I am more interested in how things evolve after Rome's elimination from the Scene. First of off, who takes power in Italy? Are there enough Etruscan's left to propose a "puppet" leauge controlled by Carthage? Most undoubtly Carthage after fighting for Two Centuries for the Island of Sicily, would finally take bake the crucial piece of Real Estate...How much power exactly will Hannibal and the Barca's have in a 2nd Punic War victory timeline? Could we see more extensive reforms, which strenghted the office of Suffett and weakend the tyrantical aristocracy in the form of the Council of 104? Might Hannibal have taken lessons from the Roman Political system and offer full fledged Citizenship to the Celtiberian Tribes who were his Mercenaries? How long would it take for Iberia to be considered fully integrated in the Punic Civilization?

Will the Celtic tribes Gaul without the Impearlistic Roman's stay disunited, and with the Carthaginian's mainly using them as a means to end for Trade routes, get fed up and form some type of alliance/nation? Will their be a renewed intrest in Punic expeditions and could we see eventual colonies spring up in Britian or even the Gold Coast of West Africa? What will be the Carthaginian Empire's relation's toward the east with the Diadochi states? Could we see an early alliance between the Carthaginian's and the Seclucid Empire? Would Egypt, Kush, and Axum be worth the trouble of Conquering in order to further expand Punic influence on the continent? How will Christianity expand throughout a Celtic-Punic World rather than a predominatley Graeco-Roman one? Might we see more technological advances without Rome? And most important how long would it take for the Carthaginian's to figure out that Imperalism rather than Thassolocracy is the way to go, inorder to cement your legacy throughout the world?

I intend to eventually start writing a timeline based on this, that I promise wont be a Carthaginian Wank but more of Discourse of what exactley happens after Rome is obliterated. So please feel free to discuss any topics that would be pertinent to this thread

 

[Onkel Willie]

How will Christianity expand throughout a Celtic-Punic World rather than a predominatley Graeco-Roman one?

First off, the strict adherents of the butterfly effect will kill you for that. With a PoD in 207 BC, it is highly unlikely that Jesus Christ will ever be born, butterflying away Christianity entirely (unless of course you believe in providence and that it was God's will which I don't believe btw).

I imagine that with a Punic victory, Carthage will be reclaiming formerly Carthagingian lands like Sicily and Sardinia. As for the rest, I have too little knowledge to answer.

 

[Flocculencio]

Well Carthage wasn't really set up to be Imperial. It probably maintains it's thallasocracy along the shores of the Western Med- the Eastern Med will still be Hellenistic and the interior of Europe will see the Celts slowly moving towards more unitary states as they were ITOL IIRC.

 

[Lysandros Aikiedes]

If Rome's OTL destiny is compromised by Hannibal Barca in 207 BCE, I imagine that would restore Carthage as the top polity in the western Mediterranean, for the time being anyway. If Rome is obliterated, Hannibal may confiscate it's warfleet, and sail back to Carthage, along with the booty from the Roman temples and houses, not to mention slaves. Hannibal might become a hero to his people, as well as a sort of military strongman ofthe state.

If the formidable Greek city of Syracuse was not sacked by Rome's Consul Marcus Claudius Marcellus in 212 BCE, they would be the main obstacle to Carthage's possible reconquest of Sicily.

In Italy, with Rome gone, there would be a power vaccuum. The Samnites of Beneventum could mobilize to re-establish their military supremacy which was robbed by the Romans early in the Third Century BCE. One other hand, the Celtic Boii and Insubre tribes in northern Italy could have designs on the leaderless city-states of Latium. Then again, perhaps either the Hellenistic kingdoms of Macedonia or Epirus may feel competent to force themselves on Italy.

Carthage, although it has a large urban population, has very few actual citizens. Those being mostly of Punic descent. Its social problems seem similar to that of Classical Athens. Some kind of revolution in their society may have to replace the Oligarchic form of government in Carthage.


In the long run, I think one of the great Gaulish confederations may have a chance to increase it's position among the other Celts, and unify the tribes of Gaul within the next couple of hundred years. By the beginning of the First Century of the Common Era, the united Gallic empire may project its power into the Mediterranean world.

In Spain, long-term Carthaginian strong-arming might encourage the Lusitani and the Celtiberian Arevaci into a period of political stabilization.

The Seleucid Empire might endure for a while without having to worry about the Romans. Although it did have other rivals like Ptolemaic Egypt, Macedonia, the Greek leagues, and the kingdoms of Bithynia, Pontus and Pergamon in the west, Bactria and the Parthians in the east. Hellenism could make further cultural strides in this TL.

Judea might end up as just a frontier satellite-state between Seleucid Syria and Ptolemaic Egypt.

 

[The Professor]

If Massilia can avoid being taken by the Carthaginians then it could be well poised to expand into Celtic Europe and former Roman North Italy. We may then see a Massilian analogue of the Roman Republic squaring off against Carthaginian States and Magna Graecia.

 

[Lysandros Aikiedes]

If Massilia can avoid being taken by the Carthaginians then it could be well poised to expand into Celtic Europe and former Roman North Italy. We may then see a Massilian analogue of the Roman Republic squaring off against Carthaginian States and Magna Graecia.

There was a reason why Massalia allied itself with the Roman Republic in the Third Century BCE. Like most Greek city-states, they probably had a small hereditary citizen-body. Plus, there was another good reason that both Romans and Greeks from that period onward were adopting Celtic military gear (Chainmail armour, short-bladed Gladius swords, Scutum/Thureos shields, and bronze Coolus-style helmets).

 

[The Professor]

There was a reason why Massalia allied itself with the Roman Republic in the Third Century BCE. Like most Greek city-states, they probably had a small hereditary citizen-body. Plus, there was another good reason that both Romans and Greeks from that period onward were adopting Celtic military gear (Chainmail armour, short-bladed Gladius swords, Scutum/Thureos shields, and bronze Coolus-style helmets).

Hmm, so it's going to have come under Carthaginian suzereignity or face being overrun by the Gauls?
If part of the Carthage thalassocracy can it maintain some identity long enough to go it alone later on?

 

[Lysandros Aikiedes]

Hmm, so it's going to have come under Carthaginian suzereignity or face being overrun by the Gauls?
If part of the Carthage thalassocracy can it maintain some identity long enough to go it alone later on?

In the late 3rd to early 2nd Centuries BCE, the most powerful tribe/kingdom in Gaul were the Arverni (based in modern French Auvergne), then ruled by the the legendary King Luernios. With the Roman Republic destroyed, Massalia may have to agree to accept becoming a protectorate of the Arverni. Since most wine-importation to Gaul went through Massalia, the profits from wine should enrich the Arverni monarchy even further.

 

[Faeelin]

In the late 3rd to early 2nd Centuries BCE, the most powerful tribe/kingdom in Gaul were the Arverni (based in modern French Auvergne), then ruled by the the legendary King Luernios. With the Roman Republic destroyed, Massalia may have to agree to accept becoming a protectorate of the Arverni. Since most wine-importation to Gaul went through Massalia, the profits from wine should enrich the Arverni monarchy even further.

Hrm. Were the Averni on the up and up yet?

My understanding is that it's really the 2nd and 1st century BC when you see Gallic urbanization really start, and I'd assume the formation of a Celtic predominant power would be tied to that.

 

[Cambyses]

Without Roman intervention I can see Macedonia re-establishing hegemony over the rest of Greece. Epirus was a spent force by this point, and neither the Aetoelian or the Achean Leagues (or Sparta for that matter) had the strength to resist Macedon for long. I suppose they could always ask the Selucids for assistance, although that would probably just lead to another pointless diadochi war.

 

[Lysandros Aikiedes]

Hrm. Were the Averni on the up and up yet?

My understanding is that it's really the 2nd and 1st century BC when you see Gallic urbanization really start, and I'd assume the formation of a Celtic predominant power would be tied to that.

It would seem like they were. Urbanization on the scale of the Greek and Roman cities began as early as the Third Century. This may have been influenced in part by trade with Greek Massalia since the 600's, contact with Rome, Carthage, and Syracuse, and the fact the Volcae tribe, that had mainly inhabited what would later become known as Roman Narbonensis, had various septs spread out as far as Spain, Germany, and even the Galatian Tectosages originated from them. The Arecomici, the large part of the Volcae tribe that still resided in southern Gaul, ruled over the cities of Narbonne, Tolosa (Tolouse), and Nemausos (Nimes).

The Arverni kingdom of southern France, sitting on the major trading routes to the north, and in the business of Gold mining, and known as coin-minters, would not have been idle.

 

[Lysandros Aikiedes]

On the subject of Carthage's longevity.

If Hannibal, returning to Carthage as the man of the hour, were to find that the Hundred and Four Senate were intimidated by his popularity, and he had the ambition to exploit his popularity, he could send a large detachment of his soldiers to hold the Senate hostage, and force them to make him the Suffet, or even the King of Carthage. Hannibal retains the bulk of his army by giving them land grants around Carthage, in Spain, or in Sicily. The mercenaries become loyalist landholders, and the backbone of Hannibal's regime in the state. Hannibal, apparently being an Iberian on his mother's side of the family, recruits Iberians or Celts from Spain, and forms them into his own private army of crack troops or bodyguards, and stations them in or around Carthage. Any of the powerful Punic families in the city of Carthage whom Hannibal suspects of treachery can be eliminated one by one, as Hannibal gives out the important offices of state to his family and lieutenants.

 

[Lysandros Aikiedes]

Without Roman intervention I can see Macedonia re-establishing hegemony over the rest of Greece. Epirus was a spent force by this point, and neither the Aetoelian or the Achean Leagues (or Sparta for that matter) had the strength to resist Macedon for long. I suppose they could always ask the Selucids for assistance, although that would probably just lead to another pointless diadochi war.

In that case, I can see Macedonia asserting complete authority in Epirus and Hellas, but during the last century since Alexander's time, many thousands of Macedonians and Greeks from the homeland had immigrated Egypt, Syria, and Mesopotamia, to help enhance the Hellenistic infrastructure of both the Ptolemy and Seleucid empires. So the Macedonian military forces would be a bit more multi-national or multi-ethnic than a century before. I think some Illyrian and Thracian groups actually sought asylum in in Macedonia, due to the Celtic incursions of Brennus during the Third Century BCE.

If Macedonia conquers Greece during this timeframe, I think some Greeks might end up fleeing to Anatolia, Rhodes, or Ptolemaic Egypt.

 

[IMP CAES AVG]

Had Carthage defeated the Roman Republic, there would be no equivalent of the Mediterranean-spanning imperium of Rome. Carthage was primarily a mercantile, colonial thalassocracy. The Punic Wars were largely the result of Rome challenging the Carthaginian status quo. If Carthage were victorious, there would be no drastic changes in the western Mediterranean, no Carthaginian equivalent of the Pax Romana. One could see the expansion of Carthaginian trading posts and colonies along the coast of Africa, beyond the Pillars of Hercules and along the European Atlantic coast, but nothing on the scale of the Roman empire. The result of this would be that smaller, indigenous empires would evolve in place of Rome. A Gallic confederacy could conceivably arise, as well as an Italic confederacy in place of the Roman Republic. In the eastern Mediterranean, the Hellenistic Diadochoi would have a longer lease on life, but the influence and spread of Hellenism would be considerably lessened without the Roman Empire.

 

[Lysandros Aikiedes]

Actually, Hellenism may be enhanced in some areas, since part of the reason for the collapse of the Seleucid Empire was due to military losses against Rome and its subsequent payment of war indemities that would have put the Seleucids in the red.

Also, the Celts had on and off been influenced by Hellenic culture, and vice versa.

Although, I mostly agree with you that there is a very small chance that Punic civilization would endure in the long-term.

 

[Lysandros Aikiedes]

In Gaul, the Arverni were somewhat expansionistic as well as wealthy. They possessed a kind of elective monarchy, even though the Verrix, or High King, was considered divinely chosen.

The Aedui ruled over a vast federation of client-tribes in northern Gaul. Within their territories were the sacred Druidical centres, located in either Cenabum (Orleans), or Autricum (Chartres), annual meetings were held by representatives from all the tribes of Gaul. However, they may have been somewhat less militaristic than the Arverni, probably they already considered themselves as the virtual rulers of Gaul, if its true that they were the ones whom usurped the formerly powerful Biturige confederation from its primacy in Gaul. They were a nation of politicians, bureaucrats, and merchants. The Arverni were their traditional foes, and considered them as renegades.

The Celtic Belgae of the north, composed of the tribes of the Bellovaci, the Nervii, the Ambiani, the Remi, the Atrebates, the Suessiones, the Morini, the Menapii, the Atuatuci, the Virumandui, the Condrusi, the Eburones, the Treveri, and the Paemani, were a highly militant confederation, and a probable wildcard.

The Volcae, based mainly in southern France along the Mediterranean coast, and had various branches of their tribe in Spain, southern Germany, and one group, the Tectosages clan in Galatia, would have benefitted from this far-flung trading network. Their homeland may have been the site of the initial political stabilization process in Gaul. It also seems that the Volcae were big players in the Delphic Expedition led by the Warlord Brennus between 281-279 BCE. Some historians believe that some of the Volcae Celts, returning from that expedition, brought treasure looted from the Greek temples back to Gaul with them.

The Sequani, living in the Franche-Comte region, began to appear in the Third Century BCE. Unlike the other Gauls, the didn't seem to share the same language. Some believe they may have originated from either Britain, or were Celticized Ligures from northern Italy. They were virtually destroyed as a nation by the Suebi invasion of the mid-First Century BCE, before Julius Caesar stepped in.

The Allobroges, whose territory was located in the regions of Dauphine, Vivarais, and Savoy, were the Celts whom attacked Hannibal's forces prior to his crossing of the Alps. Also, in 63 BCE, diplomats from that tribe would expose the Catiline Conspiracy to the Consul Marcus Tullius Cicero.

The Aquitani were a Celticized people of Iberian origins in southern Gaul whom proved to be among the most difficult to defeat.

These are some of the main groups in Gaul whom I think could possibly prosper and thrive in the absence of the Roman Empire.

 

[Lysandros Aikiedes]

I doubt the likelyhood that citizenship could be granted to non-Punics in the Carthaginian Empire. But if a highly popular and influential general were to seize power by force at arms, and establish himself as the permanent ruler, and purged a certain number of Carthaginian senators, he could grant certain priveliges to other prominent ethnic groups within the Empire. After a couple of generations, those people would be well-assimilate into Phoenician society as to believe themselves as members of that civilization.

 

[Historico]

If Rome's OTL destiny is compromised by Hannibal Barca in 207 BCE, I imagine that would restore Carthage as the top polity in the western Mediterranean, for the time being anyway. If Rome is obliterated, Hannibal may confiscate it's warfleet, and sail back to Carthage, along with the booty from the Roman temples and houses, not to mention slaves. Hannibal might become a hero to his people, as well as a sort of military strongman ofthe state.

If the formidable Greek city of Syracuse was not sacked by Rome's Consul Marcus Claudius Marcellus in 212 BCE, they would be the main obstacle to Carthage's possible reconquest of Sicily.

Sicily would undoubtably be reclaimed by the Carthage, as Hannibal himself after the Destruction of Rome might continue to move southward to the Island to make sure the Transition of Power went smoothly

In Italy, with Rome gone, there would be a power vaccuum. The Samnites of Beneventum could mobilize to re-establish their military supremacy which was robbed by the Romans early in the Third Century BCE. One other hand, the Celtic Boii and Insubre tribes in northern Italy could have designs on the leaderless city-states of Latium. Then again, perhaps either the Hellenistic kingdoms of Macedonia or Epirus may feel competent to force themselves on Italy.

I really doubt that a Carthage under the control of the Barcid's would allow for Epirus or Macedonia to gain such a significant foothold in Italy. I could however see that Thassolacratic approach used for the major cities in Italia on the Coast where trade would probably needed to be mitigated by Carthaginian Ogliarchs(Possibly a form of Exile for Counselours indisagreements with Suffete Hannibal Barca's policies).

I do like the idea of reinstating the Samnites who although had been majorly defeated by the Romans in the 2nd Holy war, they were really one one of the last tribes to fully assimliate to Roman culture, especially with the uprising against Sulla in the Social War in 98 BC. Their habit of providing Mercenaries could be extremley appealing to a Carthage that wanted to permantly stamp out Latinum Civilization.

Carthage, although it has a large urban population, has very few actual citizens. Those being mostly of Punic descent. Its social problems seem similar to that of Classical Athens. Some kind of revolution in their society may have to replace the Oligarchic form of government in Carthage.

I do agree that a Revolution would have to take place, to solve Carthage's biggest internal Social threats. Hannibal with the reforms that we know he enacted IOTL, probably would have been the best person to lead such a movement. The Question is does he take a lesson from Rome and push for a true Republic or make Carthage a Kingdom?

In the long run, I think one of the great Gaulish confederations may have a chance to increase it's position among the other Celts, and unify the tribes of Gaul within the next couple of hundred years. By the beginning of the First Century of the Common Era, the united Gallic empire may project its power into the Mediterranean world.

I definatley believe that Carthage will probably allow for the Celts to continue to coalesce in Gaul as they would provide a pretty important buffer state between the Greek Dominated East. The Greeks were never really interested in Conquering the Barbarians and would probably follow the Carthaginian policy of Ignoring the Celts untill they become the Elephant in the Room.

In Spain, long-term Carthaginian strong-arming might encourage the Lusitani and the Celtiberian Arevaci into a period of political stabilization.

I do believe that Iberia would be crucial to ensuring the endurance of Carthiginan Civilization. If the Celtiberians(Especially those tibes who fought with Hannibal) are indeed given their Citizenship and an active role in whatever new government is formed, they would become the population base of the "Empire". It would be crucial for the new Carthaginian government to bind the various tribes togehter through Punic Influence, via programs to sponsor a united language, religion, military schools and Infrastructure.

The Seleucid Empire might endure for a while without having to worry about the Romans. Although it did have other rivals like Ptolemaic Egypt, Macedonia, the Greek leagues, and the kingdoms of Bithynia, Pontus and Pergamon in the west, Bactria and the Parthians in the east. Hellenism could make further cultural strides in this TL.

Judea might end up as just a frontier satellite-state between Seleucid Syria and Ptolemaic Egypt.

The Secluids should remain friends to Carthage for atleast untill which Nation decides to take out Ptolemaic Egypt. I do not think with all the various Kingdoms from the West that the Seleucid empire will survive to long going in to the Common Era. Hellenisim however, should remain a powerful force in the East alot longer than IOTL.

 

[Historico]

Without Roman intervention I can see Macedonia re-establishing hegemony over the rest of Greece. Epirus was a spent force by this point, and neither the Aetoelian or the Achean Leagues (or Sparta for that matter) had the strength to resist Macedon for long. I suppose they could always ask the Selucids for assistance, although that would probably just lead to another pointless diadochi war.

Macedonia under Phillip V was in its last push for expansion during what would be it's last real era of Dominance. By possibly taking all of Greece and Epirus they would probably hang on for a few more centuries before the Celts come knocking

 

[Historico]

Had Carthage defeated the Roman Republic, there would be no equivalent of the Mediterranean-spanning imperium of Rome. Carthage was primarily a mercantile, colonial thalassocracy. The Punic Wars were largely the result of Rome challenging the Carthaginian status quo. If Carthage were victorious, there would be no drastic changes in the western Mediterranean, no Carthaginian equivalent of the Pax Romana. One could see the expansion of Carthaginian trading posts and colonies along the coast of Africa, beyond the Pillars of Hercules and along the European Atlantic coast, but nothing on the scale of the Roman empire. The result of this would be that smaller, indigenous empires would evolve in place of Rome. A Gallic confederacy could conceivably arise, as well as an Italic confederacy in place of the Roman Republic. In the eastern Mediterranean, the Hellenistic Diadochoi would have a longer lease on life, but the influence and spread of Hellenism would be considerably lessened without the Roman Empire.

I do agree that nothing seriously close to the Glorious Roman Empire would develop at first, but possibly with a changed political system, Carthaginian attitudes may begin to change, as new leaders would push for Hard Power rather than the Soft Power of Mercantilisim. I do concede that a much more interesting Mediterranen Lake would dominate atleast untill Steppe tribes begin to make the grand trip west to break some of these powers.