WI: Carthago non delenda est

[Otto Kretschmer]

What if either of the following scenarios happen
1. no Third Punic War, Carthage remains independent
2. Carthage becomes a satellite state of Rome
3. Carthage is annexed fully by Rome but the city itself is not destroyed and human casualties are reduced to a minimum

 

[Leonidas]

I'm not sure how plausible this would be, but it would be interesting to see a culturally trialist Roman Empire with Latins predominating in the west, Greeks in the east, and Carthaginians in the south.

 

[Otto Kretschmer]

I'm not sure how plausible this would be, but it would be interesting to see a culturally trialist Roman Empire with Latins predominating in the west, Greeks in the east, and Carthaginians in the south.

That is what I mean.

 

[Sarufiyyun]

This could've easily had been the fate of Carthage if the Mercenary War went poorly for it. Say Hamilcar Barca is killed in one of the engagements against the mutinous mercenaries and Spendius assembles a large enough horde to lay siege to Carthage. The Carthaginian Adirim could plead to Rome offering itself to the Republic and the Romans, opportunistic as they are, accept and send an army to not only defeat the mercenaries but establish Roman rule in Africa.

 

[Prince di Corsica]

In this scenario, could the Iberian Peninsula remain on the Punic side of the cultural divide? Because that would be really interesting to see

 

[Daylight Savings]

In this scenario, could the Iberian Peninsula remain on the Punic side of the cultural divide? Because that would be really interesting to see

Depends on the POD. If it's after the Second Punic War, probably not. By that point Rome had moved into the parts of Hispania under Carthaginian control and was undertaking the process of subduing the tribes that had not previously submitted to the Barcids. Before that, it's possible, though I'd expect a gradient. You might see more Latin influence in the north and east and more Punic influence in the south and west.

 

[Fabius Maximus]

In this scenario, could the Iberian Peninsula remain on the Punic side of the cultural divide? Because that would be really interesting to see

I don't think there was much of a Punic presence in the country beyond the southern/south-eastern coasts, so if the Peninsula is conquered by the Romans I think that Latin culture would become dominant as in OTL.

 

[Otto Kretschmer]

Can there be more Punicization of North Africa? .
Can we see Punic speaking modern day Algieria,vMorocco and Libya possibly? Carthage had several big cities, there definitely were people to export

 

[X Oristos]

But how not to have the destruction of Carthage?

I honestly believe that as long as Carthage was focused on maritime trade and had an inclusive type of government, it would have been destroyed by Rome. The senatorial class could not stomach a democratic or light oligarchic form of government that was focused on trade. And Carthage is too big - even without colonies- and too close to Rome to become a new Rhodes: a small trade-centered republic.

The only way I can see it happen is if Carthaginians denounce their ways of life and locate their city in the interior to become an aristocratic land-oriented city. In OTL they choose utter destruction over it. But if they actually agree to that, then their cultural influence will be limited at best.

 

[Daylight Savings]

But how not to have the destruction of Carthage?

I honestly believe that as long as Carthage was focused on maritime trade and had an inclusive type of government, it would have been destroyed by Rome. The senatorial class could not stomach a democratic or light oligarchic form of government that was focused on trade. And Carthage is too big - even without colonies- and too close to Rome to become a new Rhodes: a small trade-centered republic.

The only way I can see it happen is if Carthaginians denounce their ways of life and locate their city in the interior to become an aristocratic land-oriented city. In OTL they choose utter destruction over it. But if they actually agree to that, then their cultural influence will be limited at best.

But the premise is not that they are an independent state, but an incorporated province of the empire. They might have a democratic government, but it would have not power outside the city itself. A Roman legion would be in place securing the province and they would not be able to maintain any kind of independent army/navy. A trading based city with massive grain production capacity would be a massive tax boon. I don't see why they would have a problem with it.

 

[X Oristos]

But the premise is not that they are an independent state, but an incorporated province of the empire. They might have a democratic government, but it would have not power outside the city itself. A Roman legion would be in place securing the province and they would not be able to maintain any kind of independent army/navy. A trading based city with massive grain production capacity would be a massive tax boon. I don't see why they would have a problem with it.

The problem is that in my view, if Carthage was a prosperous trading city with inclusive government would not have been allowed to be turned into a province. A poor Carthage away from the sea could have been turned into a province.

 

[Otto Kretschmer]

Werent all cities in the East richer as well?

Alexandria, Antiochia, Athens and a myriad of other cities were rich as well

 

[Daylight Savings]

The problem is that in my view, if Carthage was a prosperous trading city with inclusive government would not have been allowed to be turned into a province. A poor Carthage away from the sea could have been turned into a province.

Why would the Romans reject a wealthy city as a province? If there's no insurrection, a Roman garrison is keeping the peace, and most importantly they are paying taxes, what is the problem. In this scenario an intact Carthage has been added to the empire. I think this is the only likely scenario out of the three presented in the OP. An independent Carthage would always be a threat and another war would happen. Satellite kingdoms did not last long in the Roman sphere, they were fully incorporated or too distant to maintain the relationship and Carthage is not too distant.

 

[Daylight Savings]

Werent all cities in the East richer as well?

Alexandria, Antiochia, Athens and a myriad of other cities were rich as well

Yes. As wealthy as Carthage was for the west, it didn't compare to the cities of the east. And those cities derived their wealth from grain production and trade, just as Carthage would.

 

[Otto Kretschmer]

A question.
If Rome conquered Carthage before Greece or never conquered Greece at all, would we see Rome ingluenced more by Punic culture than greek culture?

Carthaginian literature and philosophy was also extremely advanced as much as Greek

 

[X Oristos]

Why would the Romans reject a wealthy city as a province? If there's no insurrection, a Roman garrison is keeping the peace, and most importantly they are paying taxes, what is the problem. In this scenario an intact Carthage has been added to the empire. I think this is the only likely scenario out of the three presented in the OP. An independent Carthage would always be a threat and another war would happen. Satellite kingdoms did not last long in the Roman sphere, they were fully incorporated or too distant to maintain the relationship and Carthage is not too distant.

Alexandria, Antiochia, Athens and a myriad of other cities were rich as well

Athens was not a rich city by that point, not politically important. Athens was a prestigious city famous for its schools and philosophy. The city had no political power whatsover and was treated like Florence was treated by the 18th century noblemen in their Grand Tour.

Antioch and Alexandria posed no ideological challenges to Rome. They were absolute monarchies.

Instead, the 2nd century Carthage had an inclusive political system. A political system much more republican and inclusive of the roman one. A trading city spreads its ideological influence, especially if it is big, prosperous and close by. Remember Cato's carthaginian figs? He brandished fresh figs to show how close Carthage was. Proximity of an ideological enemy of the senatorial class was the main threat. If Carthage was reduced to an inland city ruled by a limited landed aristocracy, then it would not have been a threat.

Lastly, have in mind the period we are talking about: the mid 2nd century, when the senatorial class had reasonable fears of popular dissent. The other city that was destroyed was the rich commercial city of Corinth, again with an inclusive political system. And war came to the Achaean League when democratic leaders rose to power and presented an ideological rather than military threat to Rome. Even so, the commercial center was destroyed: not Megalopolis up in the mountains nor Argos with its agricultural economy.

The Third Carthaginian and Achaean Wars were not wars for military supremacy nor were based on fears regarding the future security of the Roman State: They were ideological wars because the senatorial class hated inclusive political systems and was hungry for plunder. Even with that kind of responce, the social crisis they were afraid of, was just postponed.

 

[stevej713]

Carthaginian literature and philosophy was also extremely advanced as much as Greek

Was it really? As far as I know there are no Carthaginian analogues to Homer, Plato, Herodotus, Strabo, etc. That's the big obstacle to talking about Carthage in general - we have almost no primary Carthaginian sources, only Greek and Roman. People speculate a lot about Carthage without realizing that what they're saying is based off of interpretations and extrapolations pulled from other sources whose accuracy can be seriously questioned.

 

[Fabius Maximus]

A question.
If Rome conquered Carthage before Greece or never conquered Greece at all, would we see Rome ingluenced more by Punic culture than greek culture?

Rome was already being influenced by Greek culture, to greater or lesser degrees, since the Regal period, and this influence only grew once the Romans conquered Magna Graecia. On the other hand, they never showed any particular inclination to imitate Punic culture, even though we know that there was contact between the two nations (Rome signed a treaty with Carthage shortly after the overthrow of the kings). So I expect Rome to be more Greek- than Punic-influenced, even if they never expand east of Brundisium.

Instead, the 2nd century Carthage had an inclusive political system. A political system much more republican and inclusive of the roman one. A trading city spreads its ideological influence, especially if it is big, prosperous and close by.

I don't think there's much evidence that the Roman Senate of this period was ideologically determined to stamp out inclusive governments, even assuming that Carthage's system at this time was actually more inclusive than the Romans' (all the detailed accounts date to centuries earlier, and generally portray Carthage as an oligarchy rather than a democracy). And what really spreads ideological influence is success. Rome had thoroughly wiped the floor with Carthage twice already and reduced the great Carthaginian Empire to a subordinate rump state. Nobody would want to copy the losers' political system.

 

[Rooki]

No third war is leaving it to late isn't it? I may be misremembering but I was under the impression they were effectively vassalised from the end of the second war, and the 3rd war was mostly about the other Punic cities throwing them under the bus? Have you seen @RiseofBubblez timeline? A New Carthaginian Age: Trade, Politics, War and Treachery in the post-Roman World. It's really good, well worth a look if you haven't already.