WI: Gauls Conquer Greece?

Maoistic

Banned
What Greek rivals to the east?We are talking about ‘liberating’ Greece—which would give a massive boost in legitimacy to the Seleucids.Unlike the otl 192 b.c.e attempt however, the Greeks are most likely gonna be wholeheartedly supporting them.
Sorry, my bad. Meant in the west in Greece itself and surrounding Greek states like Macedon and Pergamon. They were rivals to the Seleucids and I doubt the Seleucids would come in their rescue.
 
Sorry, my bad. Meant in the west in Greece itself and surrounding Greek states like Macedon and Pergamon. They were rivals to the Seleucids and I doubt the Seleucids would come in their rescue.
Seleucid relations with Pergamon and Macedon were far, far more complicated than that. Hellenistic states didn't have permanent enemies.
 

ar-pharazon

Banned
How far south could the Gauls establish themselves? The end of mainland Greece or even the hundreds of islands off the coast? Might we even see a Gaullish Crete and Rhodes?
 
Sorry, my bad. Meant in the west in Greece itself and surrounding Greek states like Macedon and Pergamon. They were rivals to the Seleucids and I doubt the Seleucids would come in their rescue.
Macedon is implied to be conquered in this case.Iotl,the King of Macedonia was killed and there was a period of chaos in the kingdom.
 
Last edited:
Conquer Greece is highly unlike. Best case scenario is to settle in an area in north Greece/Thessaly. The Galatians is a similar example.
 

Maoistic

Banned
Conquer Greece is highly unlike. Best case scenario is to settle in an area in north Greece/Thessaly. The Galatians is a similar example.
"Highly unlikely" is something I disagree with. The Celts in history expanded as far as Turkey and were some of the most effective troops under Hannibal. They sacked Rome and could have conquered it. They also sacked Delphi under the second Brennus. Heck, the Romans became a military superpower adopting Celtic swords and chainmail. It seems people assume Celts are weak because they disappeared from continental Europe, but that was precisely because the Romans feared them militarily so much that they decided to give them the Native American treatment in order to stop being a threat.
 
"Highly unlikely" is something I disagree with. The Celts in history expanded as far as Turkey and were some of the most effective troops under Hannibal. They sacked Rome and could have conquered it. They also sacked Delphi under the second Brennus. Heck, the Romans became a military superpower adopting Celtic swords and chainmail. It seems people assume Celts are weak because they disappeared from continental Europe, but that was precisely because the Romans feared them militarily so much that they decided to give them the Native American treatment in order to stop being a threat.
The Gauls were great soldiers. Don't get me wrong, i like Celts and i don't think they were weak, but conquering Greece would be highly unlikely as OTL showed us. Its another thing to raid or settle in a rather small area of Grrece and another to conquer it. The Greeks had way more troops,tech,logistics and wealth than the Brennus Invasion.
 
Maybe not Greece but Maybe Thrace and Byzantion and expand their influence from there and stage raids from there maybe even developing a naval culture and Sea raid the Mediterranean.
 
Top