alternatehistory.com

So I was thinking about this today after finishing "Taken At The Flood" By Robin Waterfield (great book btw on the Roman conquest of Greece). What if Perseus had won the battle of Pydna decisively? He never wanted the war in the first place (despite what pro-Roman sources would have you believe, it was clearly the Romans who wanted the war, not Perseus), so I can see him trying to work out some sort of peace. Now any peace is not going to be very long lasting-it might at most last the rest of Perseus's reign (though that's unlikely IMO), if he plays a good client of Rome. Eventually though, Rome will prevail in the medium run.

However, the war would likely drag on a little bit before some sort of peace is reached. And this is why I really like this POD-by extending the war, it gives Antiochus IV the breathing space to invade and conquer Egypt, like he was poised to do in 168 before Gaius Laenas famously drew a circle around him and threatened him with war if he didn't pull back. Since that was (likely) after Pydna, and since Antiochus likely tried this stunt only because Rome was distracted, here he could press on and take over Egypt.


So what effect does this have on the future of Greece and the near east? A resurgent Seleucid Empire would be nice.
Top