Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 25

Thread: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

  1. #1
    Roma_Victrix's Avatar Call me Ishmael
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    15,243

    Default What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    Gaius Julius Caesar intended to invade the Parthian Empire to avenge the fellow triumvir Marcus Licinius Crassus, who lost the Battle of Carrhae along with Roman military standards (later retrieved via diplomacy by Augustus). However, Caesar's plans were obviously cut short when he was stabbed to death in a senatorial conspiracy against him and his veiled tyranny over the Roman Republic. Despite his unlawful usurpation of Republican powers and authority, even Caesar's critics such as Cicero found admirable qualities in him. Aside from his brilliantly persuasive rhetorical and writing abilities, Caesar was obviously the greatest commander of his day. His military career stretched from what is now Spain, to France, England, Italy, Greece, Egypt, Turkey, and Tunisia. The man was a prolific victor in battle and defeated Pharnaces II of Pontus at Zela so swiftly that he felt compelled to write a terse message back to Rome: "Veni, vidi, vici" (I came, I saw, I conquered).

    Now, imagine the same man invading the Parthian Empire. Caesar was far too competent to repeat the logistical mistakes of Crassus and far too wily to fall into an obvious trap set by the Parthians or their allies. Even if he was betrayed by an Armenian ally, much how Mark Antony would discover years later, I can imagine Caesar somehow getting himself out of a bind and then winning the battle instead of retreating. He was, after all, the same guy who won at Alesia against the Gauls by ingeniously building a double set of walls around the oppidum hilltop town: one wall to keep the besieged in, and another to keep the Gaulish relief force at bay! This was hardly the only battle he won without superior numbers as well. He also knew how to entrench himself and hold out for the long run, such as when he and Cleopatra were trapped inside the palace of Alexandria by the forces of the Cleo's brother and Ptolemaic Egyptian pharaoh Ptolemy XIII (reinforcements didn't arrive until the early spring of the following year). He was also a master of psychological warfare, building bridges across the Rhine in short order, both to impress and frighten his Germanic enemies camped on the other side.

    I'd venture to say that at the very least Caesar would anticipate the exploits of Trajan by snatching the major cities along the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, reaching the Persian Gulf. Perhaps he wouldn't have the manpower or logistics to repeat the exploits of Alexander the Great in invading Persia proper, but I could definitely see him taking Mesopotamia, perhaps on a far more permanent basis than later Romans emperors, whose control over it was ephemeral and virtually lasting no more than a year or so. Armenia would be quelled by later Roman rulers, and for that matter its king was even captured by Mark Antony a few years before he lost at Actium against Octavian. If Antony could do it, Caesar (being who he was) hypothetically could have conquered Armenia within a significantly shorter span of time.

    What say you?

  2. #2
    hellheaven1987's Avatar Comes Domesticorum
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    The Hell called Conscription
    Posts
    35,615

    Default Re: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    No body knows what Caesar's war goal was; if he just wanted a revenge a punitive raid was probably his plan - in other words, no plan for permanent conquest.
    Quote Originally Posted by Markas View Post
    Hellheaven, sometimes you remind me of King Canute trying to hold back the tide, except without the winning parable.
    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    Cameron is midway between Black Rage and .. European Union ..

  3. #3

    Default Re: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    Caesar might have pushed the boundaries of the empire further east, but I don't see that having a major effect on history. I doubt Caesar could have pushed far enough east to completely conquer the Pathians, and after he was gone, the Parthians likely would regroup and take back the lost lands.

    The biggest potential change was if he lost, then the empire as we know it would could be very different. Our calendar likely would not have the name July or August for another thing.

  4. #4
    Roma_Victrix's Avatar Call me Ishmael
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    15,243

    Default Re: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    Quote Originally Posted by hellheaven1987 View Post
    No body knows what Caesar's war goal was; if he just wanted a revenge a punitive raid was probably his plan - in other words, no plan for permanent conquest.
    Caesar probably wouldn't have been appeased until he at least received the lost standards of Crassus, which the Parthians probably would have handed over once they realized the man they were up against.

    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    Caesar might have pushed the boundaries of the empire further east, but I don't see that having a major effect on history. I doubt Caesar could have pushed far enough east to completely conquer the Pathians, and after he was gone, the Parthians likely would regroup and take back the lost lands.

    The biggest potential change was if he lost, then the empire as we know it would could be very different. Our calendar likely would not have the name July or August for another thing.
    That's a fair argument. None of the later Roman invasions of the Parthian Empire made huge or very lasting changes to the political map aside from a few towns and cities on the western fringes of Mesopotamia going over to the Roman side for a while (such as Dura-Europos). The Romans did, however, succeed for a very long time in making Armenia a client state, tearing it away from direct Parthian meddling. The Sassanids obviously put that to rest in the 5th century AD when they took over eastern Armenia and the Eastern Romans became suzerains over the western half.

    If Caesar lost in Parthia, yes, his political career would be in complete disarray and his life would be in serious danger, but no more so than when he was stabbed to death in Rome. I'm not sure this would have an effect on his overall legacy so much that the month of July would be renamed after him, but it could potentially have soured the political fortunes of his designated heir Octavian. In that case, if Octavian never came to prominence, you're right, August would most certainly not be a month in our calendar and Mark Antony would most likely have the pleasure of ordaining such things.

  5. #5
    hellheaven1987's Avatar Comes Domesticorum
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    The Hell called Conscription
    Posts
    35,615

    Default Re: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    Quote Originally Posted by Roma_Victrix View Post
    Caesar probably wouldn't have been appeased until he at least received the lost standards of Crassus, which the Parthians probably would have handed over once they realized the man they were up against.
    Which is why a punitive raid, one similar as Germanicus did, should be enough.

    Quote Originally Posted by Roma_Victrix View Post
    The Romans did, however, succeed for a very long time in making Armenia a client state, tearing it away from direct Parthian meddling. The Sassanids obviously put that to rest in the 5th century AD when they took over eastern Armenia and the Eastern Romans became suzerains over the western half.
    Yes and no, Roman supremacy in Armenia wasn't absolute and Armenia often change hand back between the two until its existence was ceased.
    Last edited by hellheaven1987; April 26, 2018 at 12:36 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Markas View Post
    Hellheaven, sometimes you remind me of King Canute trying to hold back the tide, except without the winning parable.
    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    Cameron is midway between Black Rage and .. European Union ..

  6. #6

    Default Re: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    Quote Originally Posted by Common Soldier View Post
    Caesar might have pushed the boundaries of the empire further east, but I don't see that having a major effect on history. I doubt Caesar could have pushed far enough east to completely conquer the Pathians, and after he was gone, the Parthians likely would regroup and take back the lost lands.
    Agreed. I think it's possible that he (or a later Roman leader) might've weakened the Parthian royal dynasty/ruling class to the point of collapse (in which case they'd probably have been replaced by the local competition, as happened in 224 AD), but overall the distances were too great and involved too much landlocked territory.

  7. #7

    Default Re: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    Quote Originally Posted by Roma_Victrix View Post
    What say you?
    Considering that the entirety of the Parthian armies were utterly wiped out by Publius Ventidius Bassus, who was Caesar's officer,
    I'd say he would have a very good chance of at least dominating Parthia in a military aspect within the limits of Mesopotamia, as for actual permanent conquest of anything east of that, there he would have problems, but still possible.


    Quote Originally Posted by hellheaven1987 View Post
    No body knows what Caesar's war goal was; if he just wanted a revenge a punitive raid was probably his plan - in other words, no plan for permanent conquest.
    But wasn't Caesar kinda an intense Alexnaderboo?

    Considering his fandom of Alexander, he might have actually dreamed of outpacing him.

    As for what we know, the conquest would be Parthia, and then a narrow line conquest of the Black Sea coast, and then a westward push towards Germania.

    Considering it was Caesar, one does get imaginative.

    For instance, considering how unstable Parthian royal rule proved to be after the death of Parocus at the battle of Mount Gindarus, it would perhaps even be feasible that Caesars army would be filled with Parthian turncoat troops just as it was with Germans or Celts during his ventures.

    So you might have a scenario of Caesar marching around with a well payed and satisfied bunch of Parthian nobles with their levied cavalry, just as Alexander did with the 5000 Indians and 200 Elephants when he started the Mallian Campaign.

  8. #8
    hellheaven1987's Avatar Comes Domesticorum
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    The Hell called Conscription
    Posts
    35,615

    Default Re: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mamlaz View Post
    But wasn't Caesar kinda an intense Alexnaderboo?
    Yet he also commented he could not be Alexander because of his age; we have to remember that, Caesar was more like Napoleon, believed war is merely a tool for their political career instead their life goal, much different than Alexander and Lionheart (hence both often abused their power for their own GREAT ADVENTURE).

    But even Caesar wanted to push Roman border to Tigris he probably would face same problem as Augustus - the lack of reliable clients to maintain a buffer zone of stable client states.
    Quote Originally Posted by Markas View Post
    Hellheaven, sometimes you remind me of King Canute trying to hold back the tide, except without the winning parable.
    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    Cameron is midway between Black Rage and .. European Union ..

  9. #9

    Default Re: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    Well, perhaps a buffer zone would not be required.

    The Parthians were not exactly known for successfully besieging Roman cities or conquering their territory, and historically, the Roman Emperor Hadrian purposefully retreated from Trajans recently conquered Mesopotamia, instead of it being conquered by the Parthians.

    If Caesar managed to conquer it and the rule there manged to solidify for at least a decade or two, that area could have become what Roman eastern border was historically.

    That is, until the infantry far more adept Sassanids arrive.

  10. #10
    Roma_Victrix's Avatar Call me Ishmael
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    15,243

    Default Re: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    Quote Originally Posted by athanaric View Post
    Agreed. I think it's possible that he (or a later Roman leader) might've weakened the Parthian royal dynasty/ruling class to the point of collapse (in which case they'd probably have been replaced by the local competition, as happened in 224 AD), but overall the distances were too great and involved too much landlocked territory.
    Right, Alexander's Empire reached into Central Asia and South Asia, but he didn't have Western Europe to manage at the same time. This was obviously unlike the Roman Republic which at this point controlled almost all of Western Europe minus the northwestern corner of Spain (soon to be taken by Augustus) and of course the British Isles and Ireland (with England, Wales, and southern Scotland to fall under Roman dominion a century later). Logistically speaking, the Roman Empire was stretched too far to the west to concern itself with the deep interior of Asia. Managing this unwieldy beast was the reason why Constantine made Constantinople the new capital with an outlook towards the east, so that a watchful eye could be kept on Sasanian activities (as well as the Pontic Steppe to the north). Meanwhile, the subsequent Western Roman emperors, from their various seats of power in Italy including Rome itself and Ravenna, could look after the Western half.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mamlaz View Post
    Considering that the entirety of the Parthian armies were utterly wiped out by Publius Ventidius Bassus, who was Caesar's officer,
    I'd say he would have a very good chance of at least dominating Parthia in a military aspect within the limits of Mesopotamia, as for actual permanent conquest of anything east of that, there he would have problems, but still possible.
    The entirety of their armies? That's a fairly big exaggeration. However, it did create a Parthian succession crisis with the death of Crown Prince Pacorus, while simultaneously crushing any Parthian hopes of taking over the Levant and eastern Anatolia. The Parthians would never again invade or meddle in the affairs of regions that far to the west, including Judea where they had attempted to establish a client king before the victories of Ventidius Bassus (who, it should be noted, was under the triumviral command of Mark Antony, since Julius Caesar had been dead for six years at this point).

    But wasn't Caesar kinda an intense Alexnaderboo?
    Indeed, he was (and so was Mark Antony, who also attempted an invasion of Parthia and more successfully the Kingdom of Armenia). In fact, here's a manga that Caesar himself created in honor of Alexander the Great.

    Considering his fandom of Alexander, he might have actually dreamed of outpacing him.
    Not sure if that was possible, given the aforementioned constraints of the Roman Republic at the time, but he could have reasonably taken significant chunks of Mesopotamia and almost certainly the whole of Armenia. If Mark Antony could achieve the latter, then Caesar no doubt would have surpassed him somehow.

    For instance, considering how unstable Parthian royal rule proved to be after the death of Parocus at the battle of Mount Gindarus, it would perhaps even be feasible that Caesars army would be filled with Parthian turncoat troops just as it was with Germans or Celts during his ventures.
    That would be Pacorus, not Parocus.

    So you might have a scenario of Caesar marching around with a well payed and satisfied bunch of Parthian nobles with their levied cavalry, just as Alexander did with the 5000 Indians and 200 Elephants when he started the Mallian Campaign.
    You make a good argument about turncoat troops, although the Parthian nobility was incredibly anti-Roman, so perhaps only the lesser nobility would join him. For instance, they hated the Italian-born Musa of Parthia and drove her and her incestuous son Phraates V into exile in Roman territory. The incest was just the icing on the cake for them; they already disapproved of her. I would imagine that Caesar would not have an easy time invading further west than the Tigris and Euphrates river valleys. For starters, the Zagros Mountains provided a huge land barrier between Mesopotamia and Persia. Alexander was able to get through, but not without great difficulty and really only because he had broken the Achaemenid Persian armies on several occasions beforehand, starting in Anatolia. At that point it was more of a mop-up job for Alexander.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mamlaz View Post
    Well, perhaps a buffer zone would not be required.
    Perhaps enlarging the domains of the Kingdom of Armenia would have sufficed, although this would also make them a greater power, and Rome was chiefly concerned about dividing and conquering both its enemies and allies alike. It didn't want one of its clients gaining too much power to the point where they could break ranks and rebel against their Roman patron. Perhaps Caesar would turn the Parthian nobles against each other by acting the partisan and granting privileges to a select few who would rule tiny client states in and around the borders between Rome and Parthia in Mesopotamia, along the Zagros range. That would ensure a stable buffer zone while at the same time ensuring that neither was strong enough to swallow the others or defy Rome in any significant way.

    The Parthians were not exactly known for successfully besieging Roman cities or conquering their territory, and historically, the Roman Emperor Hadrian purposefully retreated from Trajans recently conquered Mesopotamia, instead of it being conquered by the Parthians.
    Actually, prior to the Roman victory at the Battle of Mount Gindarus which you noted above, the Parthians invaded both the Levant and Eastern Anatolia. In conjunction with the Roman turncoat Labienus, the Parthians not only occupied Syria, but they also took what is now Lebanon (Phoenicia), taking everything but Tyre, and moved into Judea, establishing a Jewish client ruler Antigonus II Mattathias. They defeated the pro-Roman high priest of Judea, Hyrcanus II, while the Roman ally Herod was forced to flee to Masada. Antigonus II Mattathias reigned until 37 BC, a year after the victory of Ventidius Bassus at Mount Gindarus.

  11. #11
    hellheaven1987's Avatar Comes Domesticorum
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    The Hell called Conscription
    Posts
    35,615

    Default Re: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mamlaz View Post
    If Caesar managed to conquer it and the rule there manged to solidify for at least a decade or two, that area could have become what Roman eastern border was historically.
    Hence you don't understand Roman administration system in 1st Century; the problem is, Roman did not develop a proper bureaucratic system for provincial administration at that time, hence ruler often had to rely on local clients to govern the region for them (the so call patron system). In other words, Caesar would have to govern Middle East just like how he govern Gaul, which in reality is just a loose alliance of Gaulic tribes united because of their common alliance with Caesar himself. But then the problem is, if the client can ally with Roman why he cannot ally with someone else? In Gaul that is stupid question since no power can challenge Rome, but in Middle East that is a viable choice...

    And hence all that Armenia crap until Armenia itself ceased exist.
    Last edited by hellheaven1987; April 27, 2018 at 01:22 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Markas View Post
    Hellheaven, sometimes you remind me of King Canute trying to hold back the tide, except without the winning parable.
    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    Cameron is midway between Black Rage and .. European Union ..

  12. #12

    Default Re: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    Quote Originally Posted by hellheaven1987 View Post
    In other words, Caesar would have to govern Middle East just like how he govern Gaul, which in reality is just a loose alliance of Gaulic tribes united because of their common alliance with Caesar himself.

    But wasn't Gaul very soon directly absorbed as a province?

    Also Egypt? and other areas as well?

    The reason they kept with the client states for some time in Asia is because it suited them better, that does not mean it was not doable.

    Heck, didn't Caesar literally give loyal Celtic tribal leaders positions in the Roman Senate just years after conquest?

    It seems to me that direct integration of Mesopotamia would not require the game of client states, it would of course make it a lot easier and quicker, but far from it being impossible.

  13. #13
    hellheaven1987's Avatar Comes Domesticorum
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    The Hell called Conscription
    Posts
    35,615

    Default Re: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mamlaz View Post
    But wasn't Gaul very soon directly absorbed as a province?

    Also Egypt? and other areas as well?
    In name only; all those places were largely remain local rule until 2nd Century.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mamlaz View Post
    The reason they kept with the client states for some time in Asia is because it suited them better, that does not mean it was not doable.
    It was possible but extreme costly, as just the cost of military maintenance would suck up all the tax revenue of several provinces. On the other hand it did reduce possibility of revolt, as it disarmed the client state.
    Quote Originally Posted by Markas View Post
    Hellheaven, sometimes you remind me of King Canute trying to hold back the tide, except without the winning parable.
    Quote Originally Posted by Diocle View Post
    Cameron is midway between Black Rage and .. European Union ..

  14. #14

    Default Re: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    ?

    Egypt or Gaul in local rule?

    Who ruled then?

    Egypt was nearly a private fief by the time Augustus was done with it, and Gaul had Roman citizens with mustaches marching up and down around it, there was no local rule but just ordinary regional government just like in Spain, Africa or Italy, with the only difference being that the dudes across the Alps like mustaches more.

    There were no client rulers anywhere there and neither would they be so necessary in Mesopotamia in case of a Parthian defeat.

    The Roman army would be stacked there either way, in the eastern border, just as it was historically in the Levant, it would just be the same thing just a bit more eastwards...so I do not even see a reason for a client ruler there to be necessary, in fact, I'd argue that a direct control, considering the mass of soldiery that would already be there, would be even preferable.

  15. #15

    Default Re: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    It would appear that Caesar planned to leave Rome and embark on the Parthian campaign at the 18th of March, just three days after his assassination.


    Ugh, they could have waited until he returns or fails

  16. #16
    Ἀπολλόδοτος Α΄ ὁ Σωτήρ's Avatar Yeah science!
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Άργος - Ἑλλάς
    Posts
    1,293

    Default Re: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mamlaz View Post
    Ugh, they could have waited until he returns or fails
    If I were his political opponent I would definitely not prefer to wait if he'd return as a second Alexander. Hoping that he'd fail would be to much of a risk to take, and if he'd succeeded, his popularity would be so massive that it would be nearly impossible to assassinate him with impunity.

    In regard to the original question, a more interesting would be to speculate what would happen if he'd manage to conquer the Iranian Plateau, how would the Romans fair against the Saka and later Yuezhi invaders, provided that they don't lose the grip on the region which seemed rather hostile, with all those persian Fratarakas and Mobads waiting to get rid of those "devious" foreign influences.
    Last edited by Ἀπολλόδοτος Α΄ ὁ Σω May 05, 2018 at 11:07 AM.
    "First get your facts straight, then distort them at your leisure." - Mark Twain

    οὐκ ἦν μὲν ἐγώ, νῦν δ' εἰμί· τότε δ' ούκ ἔσομαι, ούδέ μοι μελήσει

  17. #17

    Default Re: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    Perhaps only the western part would be taken while in the east a client Parthian ruler would continue to rule.

    I mean, the income that a Roman administered Mesopotamia could generate would probably wave off any required cost to continue Roman rule over the Zagros.

  18. #18
    Lord Oda Nobunaga's Avatar 大信皇帝
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Azuchi-jō Tenshu
    Posts
    23,463

    Default Re: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    He would probably annex Mesopotamia as a province and set up various client states. One in Ctesiphon, one in Susa and one in Ecbatana. I just don't see how the Romans could have ruled Iran as provinces. Not only are they too far away but Iran itself has a massive population that governing all of these people would be extremely hard. I suppose Caesar could appoint an Exarchos or a Proconsul to govern all of these areas. But long term Iran would experience its fair share of revolts and having to send men and resources over the mountains to put down these revolts in the Iranian's own territory would be quite difficult.

    "Famous general without peer in any age, most superior in valor and inspired by the Way of Heaven; since the provinces are now subject to your will it is certain that you will increasingly mount in victory." - Ōgimachi-tennō

  19. #19
    Ἀπολλόδοτος Α΄ ὁ Σωτήρ's Avatar Yeah science!
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Άργος - Ἑλλάς
    Posts
    1,293

    Default Re: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    In essence it's not so much as financial costs that would make the control of the Plateau difficult, but the lack of manpower as well as overextension of Romans. Unlike Alexander's, their possessions, both in Europe and Africa, had a much larger border to defend, as well as more populous enemies, having to defend against invaders from Transoxiana would be quite taxing.

    A client ruler in the Plateau would be too powerful, while a group of weaker rulers might need more support, in addition to that they'd likely be considered illegitimate. Not saying it would be impossible, but highly unlikely that Rome manage to exert control east of Mesopotamia longer than Caesar's lifespan.
    "First get your facts straight, then distort them at your leisure." - Mark Twain

    οὐκ ἦν μὲν ἐγώ, νῦν δ' εἰμί· τότε δ' ούκ ἔσομαι, ούδέ μοι μελήσει

  20. #20
    Lord Oda Nobunaga's Avatar 大信皇帝
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Azuchi-jō Tenshu
    Posts
    23,463

    Default Re: What if Julius Caesar lived long enough to invade Parthia, as he had planned?

    Yeah exactly. Holding onto Mesopotamia might not be too hard, however the Iranian plateau across the mountains would be a different animal altogether. Caesar could balkanize the area and appoint multiple client rulers. Though the inherent problem with breaking up Iran into multiple regions is that it would inevitably reunify sooner or later. Iran is generally a cohesive nation with the bad habit of breaking up along tribal and by extension feudal lines.

    The south west has the benefit that it is the most developed, with the best cities, farming and infrastructure. The north east on the other hand has a lot of tribal manpower. So we could do a little calculations game to determine which side of civilization wins out in a given scenario. Seeing as the Parthians came to power by exploiting the declining Iranian civilization and conquering through force of arms this might give a point to the barbaric elements of the Iranic peoples. It might be too early for a Persian restoration as we saw in Sassanian times, but if Caesar destroys Parthian tribal and feudal power it might happen.

    As you suggested a weakened Iran might led to another external force moving in and conquering all of it. Maybe someone from the north east would take advantage of it. I just can't see the Romans having a huge impact on the development of an Iranian culture. I give it maybe a century before it breaks off completely or turns into something else. It might even happen sooner than that depending on how well Caesar destroys local power and integrates them into his empire.

    "Famous general without peer in any age, most superior in valor and inspired by the Way of Heaven; since the provinces are now subject to your will it is certain that you will increasingly mount in victory." - Ōgimachi-tennō

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •