What if Carthage simply didn't exist? The Phoceanian traders and Dido (first queen of Carthage) didn't build Carthage or settle that area of North Africa (modern day Tunisia).

What would the effects on the Mediterranean be without a Carthaginian trade power? Could a Rome as we know it even exist without a major power to challenge it early on? Would North Africa and Sicily even ever be conquered by Rome without a Carthage? What would be the effects on the Hellenistic Kingdoms without a Carthage rivalry? Etc.

What would the world be like without Carthage?
 
If the Phoenicians didn't settle North Africa? Well, that's quite a few colonies gone, and they'd have to settle another part of the world. Below is a map of Phoenician colonies, and North Africa west of Libya was clearly deeply colonized by them more than any other part of the Mediterranean.

Phoenician_Colonies_ua.PNG
 
More so focused on Carthage. The rest of those colonies in modern Tunisia never amounted to much. The Berbers had more influence over those places then the Carthaginians did. Really it's amazing the Berbers didn't just sack Carthage.

So focusing on Carthage specifically. What would the effects be?
 
More so focused on Carthage. The rest of those colonies in modern Tunisia never amounted to much. The Berbers had more influence over those places then the Carthaginians did. Really it's amazing the Berbers didn't just sack Carthage.

So focusing on Carthage specifically. What would the effects be?

Utica wasn't a small fry in all honesty. Especially in Rome.
 
One could argue that the very reason those other colonies didn't become prominent was because of Carthie hegemony. If Carthage never rises, I would expect another colony to take its place (probably Utica). Of course, there's always the possibility of a multipolar Phoenician diaspora, in which the Phoenicians end up more like the Greeks with no single hegemonic city-state.
 
More so focused on Carthage. The rest of those colonies in modern Tunisia never amounted to much. The Berbers had more influence over those places then the Carthaginians did. Really it's amazing the Berbers didn't just sack Carthage.

Many of those colonies were, in fact, sister states to Carthage with various degrees of union to it.
 
One could argue that the very reason those other colonies didn't become prominent was because of Carthie hegemony. If Carthage never rises, I would expect another colony to take its place (probably Utica). Of course, there's always the possibility of a multipolar Phoenician diaspora, in which the Phoenicians end up more like the Greeks with no single hegemonic city-state.

That would be really interesting. A stronger more spread out Phoenician influence in North Africa without a dominating Carthage would likely lead to a Greek city state type of situation. You could see a more advanced Numidians then in our timeline without Carthaginian oppression of the Berber peoples. Granted the Phoenicans would be greatly out numbered but as long as the Phoenicans just trade and not do much conquering as in our timeline we could see an ironically more advanced North Africa.
 
Many of those colonies were, in fact, sister states to Carthage with various degrees of union to it.

Well of course, but Carthage had such a superiority complex that those sister states were kept down from their true potential.
 
IIRC, Carthage was founded around 750 BC, so this is a fairly early POD. Greeks would probably be much more dominant in the Western Mediterranean in this case. Carthage was placed in a very strategic position for trade beween Sicily and North Africa, so I assume that if the Phoenicians had not build a colony here, the Greeks would make one. It is difficult to say for sure how the butterflies would affect Rome, but Rome was also in a strategic position, so it is a relatively safe bet to assume that it would still be an important city.
 
There were quite a few Hellenic and Phoenician colonies in the Western Mediterranean that were destroyed in a tit-for-tat war that there is not much information on. Many of the Greek colonies along the coast of southern Gaul and eastern Iberia were destroyed by the Phoenicians and likewise many Phoenician colonies were destroyed by vengeful Hellenics. Massalia was one of the few Hellenic survivors of this early war for colonisation.

It is weird to see everyone immediately think of Rome when there is no Carthage. Likely there may be more balkanised Phoenician statelets with larger cities like Gades or Utica may establish a western hegemony of sorts. The Hellenic and Phoenician back and forth over Sicily may end with the Greeks total dominance and thus stop the rule of Tyrants of Syracuse and the excuse they had for maintaining their power. Perhaps it could even allow Athens to conquer the city in the Peloponnesian Wars if its citizenry has not been hardened with unceasing conflict with the Phoenicians over the island.

Pyrrhus of Epirus may have not been conflicted over whether to go to Macedon or Sicily, instead taken the throne of Macedon and returned to Italy with the power of a full Successor Kingdom to finish off the nascent state of Rome. He would then leave Italy out of disinterest to be ravaged and ruined by various minor city-states that crawl out of the wreckage.
 
Top