The Battle of Cunaxa, which led to Artaxerxes II Mnemon ruling the empire up until his death in 358 BC, was a crucial moment. Artaxerxes II seemed to be more focused on the pleasures, rather than duties, of ruling, and despite managing to regain Ionia and quash any aspiring hegemonies in Greece, continuing to back differing factions to keep it divided, in the peace of Antalcidas, Egypt was lost and would not be regained until 343 BC, and even then only due to the treachery of a few Greek mercenary generals. It was during his reign when the empire reached it's lowest point prior to Alexander, in the Satraps Revolt, and ultimately, the Achaemenids were weaker than before, and unable to curtail the Macedonian hegemony. But it would doubtlessly be worse, if both Cyrus the Younger and Artaxerxes II died at Cunaxa, Egypt might manage to not only gain independence, but expand into the Levant as well, creating a "defensive zone", and the Achaemenids might not be in a position to start the Corinthian War or fend off Agesilaus, while the Achaemenids are thrown into another succession crisis. Could his campaign in Ionia succeed? What gains can both Evagoras of Cyprus and the Egyptians make? Would Cilicia still become a normal satrapy? Would the Satraps revolt happen earlier? Would even Babylon rebel? Who would become the new Great King? And also, what would happen to the Ten Thousand and their journey?
WI: Both Artaxerxes II and Cyrus the Younger die at Cunaxa?
- Thread starter SunKing105
- Start date
Ariaeus, one of the Achaemenid generals at Cunaxa, received an offer by the Ten Thousand that they would make him king, but he refused, stating that he was not of royal blood. I can't see his claim garnering much support, but could the Ten Thousand attempt to back another claimant or pretender to the Achaemenid throne in the inevitable civil war that will follow?