WI Shapur II of Persia was born a girl in 309 AD?

When Persian King Hormisda II (302–309) died, the Persian magnates killed his eldest son Adarnasses, blinded the second, and imprisoned the third (Hormisda, who afterwards escaped to the Roman Empire). The throne was reserved for the unborn child of one of the wives of Hormisda II, who was Jewish. It is said that Shapur II may have been the only king in history to be crowned in utero, the crown was placed upon his mother's belly. This child, named Shapur, was therefore born king; the government was conducted by his mother and the magnates. But when Shapur II came of age, he turned out to be one of the greatest monarchs of the dynasty.
WI Shapur was born a girl instead of a boy??? Does the girl still succeeds as Queen (since she was crowned as a fetus) or some relative of Hormisda II or another magnate gets the Throne?
How is this altering History? Any thoughts?
 
Could the Roman Empire had benefited from a potential civil war in Persia over Hormisda's II succession if Shapur II turned to be a girl?
 
Could the Roman Empire had benefited from a potential civil war in Persia over Hormisda's II succession if Shapur II turned to be a girl?

DG

I think the best benefit Rome could have had from such a conflict would have been to keep well out of it and lick their own wounds while the Persians were cutting each other apart. Possibly some subtle help, either to establish a relatively friendly monarch or failing that to keep the pot boiling. However avoid like the plague trying to get directly involved.

Steve
 
I guess that the option of a Queen Regnant in Persia (ala Zenobia) is out of the question then...
Roman Empire could support the exiled Prince Hormisda as the lawful King in order to bring more chaos to the Persian Empire...
Plus there would be religious tolerance in Persia since the Persian magnates wouldnt care about Christians in the middle of a civil war...
 
Top