Also between this and knowing he ate cottage cheese with canned pineapple or ketchup has me conflicted on this dweebish monster
Also between this and knowing he ate cottage cheese with canned pineapple or ketchup has me conflicted on this dweebish monster
ridiculous machine, the persians wouldn't affect Rome in any way! Rome wasn't even the master of Latium when that shit was going down
I'd disagree somewhat, I think there would be a distinct possibility that many Greeks would migrate into the colonial city-states their respective home cities formed on the southern Italian peninsula and strengthened the Greek foothold to the point they could more strongly rebuff the later attempts of Dionysius I of Syracuse to create a kingdom, but there also exists a distinct possibility that Dionysius could possibly instead focus his conquests on the peninsula moreso than his vainglorious attempts at fucking around in Greece and and soon after finding out.
Italiote historiography is pretty sparse, it's hard to imagine what 'more' Greek immigration looks like without any idea how much was happening irl. but they'd need to federate either under a Syracusan domination or the Italiote League to matter much more than they did and have a chance to rebuff the italians (principally romans). simply more greeks living in that bunch of back-stabbing cities don't seem like they'd pose much more significant of a threat
Well you'd have to think about the fact that in the time span of a theoretical victory of the Persian empire over the Greek city states and its aftereffects shortly after would roughly coincide with both the period of plebeian unrest against the patricians and the Celtic raids into the peninsula. A federated italiote league of the magna graecians or possibly more likely Syracusian league/kingdom would have a much easier time securing southern Italy and possibly putting a wet blanket on Roman expansion.
Syracuse strikes me as the most ambitious and proactive, if greeks refugees are used to explain a triumph over carthage and final domination of sicily, then they could snake up the boot in time to meet the romans or samnites as they were developing, and have good odds against them. unless some dorkass like dionysius still tries fighting in mainland Greece. or taking armies to africa to pursue the carthaginians.
this is a really fun setting, that paradox Imperator game is close, the final dlc for Rome II total war 'Rise of the Republic' is also pretty close
I think unless they stuck to being wine drinking coastal elitists, they'd have a tough time chewing on the Lucanians for a long time, but I think there could've been an angle at trying to use Rome's Latin neighbors as footholds to come in via the sea and wage a proper campaign.
Honestly would be a completely absurd move to try and take the fight to Carthage proper even if a lot of their armies were tied up in managing their growing little kingdom with keeping the peace among the slowly integrating Libiyan tribes. Such a foolish campaign could've caused a power vacuum with the fall of Syracuse and lead to an earlier carthaginian hegemony over the Mediterranean before the romans could ever really take off and start their imperial republic
Holy shit what a dirtbag, imagine how far he could've gone in that alternate timeline
like a hellenistic Francesco Sforza perfidious and bold
Hear me out: they're all reincarnations of Prigo through out the ages
yeah the persians were attempting to impose the tributary system and collect taxes from the greeks. probably the only real difference is that alexander the great's conquest might have played out as a rebellion, instead.
edit: as you elaborated upon in your other comment
a persian victory would not have fundamentally changed the relationships to production, this is disguised great person thinking
or like a conquest-genocide model of thinking, Persian victory would eliminate the greeks, Greek victory had eliminated the Persians, or at least their influence in the Mediterrean (none of these suppositions are true, of course).