What would the modern world be like if Hannibal had won the Second Punic War?
As in, Rome was broken into, sacked and its entire population put to the sword or enslaved. It's erased from existence.
How might the future unfold?
I imagine it would probably be pretty equal to the roman empire, if not greater.
The Carthaginians were far superior sailors. North Africa was extremely fertile too.
They might have spread east first, leaving the barbarians to the north until later.
Bumping for someone more learned than I to give an opinion
>>363077
I'm kind of surprised at that. I had heard people suggest that Carthage's growth would have been much more restrained.
>>363077
>The Carthaginians were far superior sailors.
Yeah it's not Rome raped them on that front from the invention of the corvus onward. It literally took then half a war to close the gap.
>North Africa was extremely fertile too.
No more than Italy, but less populous and with a very strong neighbour on each side preventing easy expansion.
Yeah I'm not seeing Carthage becoming anything mor than it was before the wars. Certainly not Rome tier, let alone greater (top kek).
>>362685
More of the same
Rome was quite something
>>362685
Carthage never had the ambition that Rome had. Rome wanted to subjugate the world and bring Roman values to everyone. The carthaginians just wanted to to protect their trade routes so they could get rich.
Which is why they had no real standing army aside from their navy.
So Carthage would probably keep to their corner and dominate mediterranean trade but not do much aside from that. Maybe the Ptolemies or Seleucids would get their shit together and take the east.
>>362685
One likely result is that "we" in the modern world, assuming a "modern world" did develop in this hypothetical universe, would know a lot more about the Carthaginian/Phoenician culture.
As it stands today, we know very little about them and basically all of what we know comes from what their enemies wrote down. I sometimes wonder if in fact they did have a great culture that has been lost; the last remnants of knowledge about them being destroyed at the Library of Alexandria.
Another longshot, but fun speculation: Given that they were great seafarers, one wonders if they would have started expanding their reach and perhaps even have made it to the New World (there are some who believe a stray Phoenician ship or two did in fact make it)
>>364429
>Maybe the Ptolemies or Seleucids would get their shit together and take the east.
Or Pontus. Imagine Mithridates without Sulla and Lucullus on his ass.
Can Roman culture be considered more modern than Carthage?
>>364531
Considering that what's typically considered the core of roman culture was developed 2 centuries after the punic wars, yes, roman culture is necessarily more modern. If you mean is it closer to our current one, I don't think there'd be much of a difference.
>>364448
>perhaps even have made it to the New World
There's a documentary about that, it's pretty interesting.
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/secrets/carthages-lost-warriors-watch-the-full-episode/1163/
>>364576
>http://www.pbs.org/wnet/secrets/carthages-lost-warriors-watch-the-full-episode/1163/
Thanks bro, that looks awesome.
BTW if you live here in the Northeast, there are a shit-ton of strange runes/inscriptions/stone monuments around New England of completely unknown origin, but most similar to finds in Northwest Europe. Lived here my whole life and never knew about them until very recently.
>>364640
Probably an early coming of Pre-European people, the North american indians have plenty of r1b haplogroups so isn't that far fetched.
>>364717
That's my thought too. Maybe even the same proto-European group that built monuments like Stonehenge.
We always think of North American Indians as mongoloid, but the early post-Columbian explorers described a wide diversity of Indian groups, including many who were tall and caucasoid.
WE
>>364840
WUZ
>>364844
KANGS
>>364847
SHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIET
>>364836
For what I seen Iroquese and other NW tribes tend to be a lot less like the Messo ones, taller and with sharper faces and not the wide and small kind like the Apaches or Pueblo.
>>364855
The Algonquin in the Northeast also have clear caucasoid traits.
>>364411
there's something funny about the post, "the greatest civilisation was quite something hmm"
>>364885
Yup they look almost Basque/iberian to me, but with a lot less hair and no beards, and perhaps taller tough in the last time and with better food Spaniards tend to be taller than they were.
>>364937
Why are modern anthropologists/archaeologists so resistant to the idea that there may have been non-Asiatic migrations to North America?
>>364429
>Carthage never had the ambition that Rome had.
They were setting up colonies in Spain my friend.
>>362685
Does anyone know what race/ethnic group the Carthaginians were?
>>365150
Cause proofs need to be found.
>>365194
African black.
>>365172
To help paying the debts they had with rome, Iberia had plenty of mines of silver, iron or tin in the north,and the local Turdetanians (than were some what part of the descendents of the Tartessians) were pretty decadent and had shitty armies . The other tribes were good warriors and mercs but hated the guts of each other, Halmiclar did pretty of impressive shit in Iberia, he fought and won a big ass Turdetian army, he allied with the sea nearby tribes like the Olcades, Bastetani (than had an important trade with local Punics) and even the Edetani and Crushed all the others or made them they client kings (like the Ilergetes). Shame we don't have first acounts of all this.
>>365194
Think Lebs mixed with Argelians and you would have you average Carthago mutt.
>>365194
Phoenicians. The same as Lebanese and Syrians.
>>365297
Look at Italy and Greece
Haven't been relevant politically in 500 years, despite being the center of European culture and intellectual thought two times each (Ancient Rome and Renassaince Italy, and Ancient Greece + Byzantine-Roman)
>>365323
Are they really the same people either though?
I mean, the Latins of the Roman Republic are clearly not the same group as those who made the Renaissance happen (perhaps descendants of Goths/Lombards).
And I find it hard to believe there is pure genetic continuity between the ancient Greeks (the most brilliant and creative people of antiquity) and the short, dysfunctional 92-IQ Greeks of today. Maybe the Helots and other Greek slaves just outbred the Indo-European Spartans and Athenians.
>>365389
The Greeks have had a rough 700 or so years.
>>365389
>I mean, the Latins of the Roman Republic are clearly not the same group as those who made the Renaissance happen (perhaps descendants of Goths/Lombards).
Clearly how? I remember reading stuff about mainland Italy being the most homogeneous and unchanged region of Europe.
>>366018
That must be the Iberian Paeninsula or the Irish Isles, the basques are like in the 95 or more of the same haplogroup and some parts of Ireland are the same.
>>362685
The future would be very, very different. Roman values would not exist to influence the incoming Germanic hordes that would still (assuming nothing changed aside from Rome's existence) be chased out of Eastern Europe by steppe horse niggers.
Europe would be a much, much more Germanic place. Eastern Germanic languages like Gothic might have survived, as well as others like Frankish. Christianity would have a different theology, following, and structure. If it exists at all. Remember, the Jews forced the Romans' hands into executing the son of God for them. Jesus would still be born, but I doubt the Carthiginians would have expanded to take over the Middle East and Asia Minor like the Romans did. They would solidify their power in North Africa and Spain because they realized having a large standing army, like Rome did, meant a constant expansion effort to pay those hungry soldiers.
Jesus would be born into Judea, but the Jews cannot kill one of their own because of standing laws that predate Carthage itself. They would have to get some other goy to do it for them. It might even stand that Jesus would not be the martyr at all. Just a lifelong prophet like Muhammed.
It's an interesting question OP. Carthage sacrificed a lot of babies to Baal Hammon... their population would not expand as quickly as Rome's did as well. Their culture stood on the value of money comes from commerce, not money comes from war. Their religion stressed strong internal values - and infanticide - rather than protection in wars of aggression. The world would be a much more Germanic, perhaps pagan too, world. North Africa might not be the Islamic, Arabicized place it is today. It might be a Phoenician, pagan place
>>364383
Really?
>>365297
They're "dysfunctional" because their entire culture and religion changed 1300 years ago.
>>365150
By what route would they have emigrated? There's literally only the Bering Strait.
>>365213
>To help paying the debts they had with rome
They colonised Iberia before they had any conflict with Rome.
>>365297
It's pretty hard to be functional in a region that's become destabilised.
>>365389
>Are they really the same people either though?
I knew a Greek kid who Claimed he had spartan heritage, but he was a fucking idiot and a liar.
Would christianity be founded if Mary can't have sex with a roman soldier?
>>370101
Not him but a state ruled by merchants that relies heavily on mercenaries doesn't strike me as an expansionist and assimilation machine.
>>370185
Well Sparta is still populated isn't it? Thought it was already a bloody tourist resort in Roman Republic times.
>>365389
>And I find it hard to believe there is pure genetic continuity between the ancient Greeks (the most brilliant and creative people of antiquity) and the short, dysfunctional 92-IQ Greeks of today.
You realise that a large part of why Greece were a peak civilization of their time is because they got the idea of civilization relatively quickly after it was formed, due to being located very close to the middle east, where cities were invented?
And that they were well placed to utilise this advantage to establish widespread colonies in the mediterranean before any genuine rival could develop, due to having already developed decent ships, which was made necessary due to living on an archipelago? And that the wealth this gave them afforded them the luxury of fully expressing and developing their culture?
If you look at which civilizations dominate from the beginning, they just slowly spread out regionally.
sumeria -> egypt, babylon, phoenicia -> persia, greece -> persia, rome, carthage -> etc.
You can also see how civilization extends northwards in europe after the idea came from the romans.
By this point in time the idea of civilization, and many other ideas, including those the greeks came up with themselves, have spread out quite a lot. The greeks declining in relevence really doesn't require their genetic makeup to change that much.
In general, genetics don't play as big a role in a people establishing an important civilization as you imply here.
>>370279
Perhaps their merchant culture, and their naval dominance, would result in them establishing a lot of trading colonies for that med dosh, and those colonies would slowly spread out like in iberia and sicilly.
>>370152
Carthago nova and the other Punic colonies were more trade outpost, they only started to colonize it in full after the first punic war.
>>370312
But establishing far flung colonies doesn't an Empire make.
>>371065
I didn't say in that post that I thought they would become an empire, although I think that the wealth they got from those colonies would enable them to establish more of a land presence and colonise the territories, as economics of scale would make those actions profitable. Plus in the resultant power vacuum, they would probably end up as an empire.
>>371051
Well since they never intended to repay their debts, it was probably a result of their competition with rome.
>>370148
austronesians straight over pacific in their little canoes and cro-magnon over frozen atlantic ocean during late ice age
>>371691
Mind providing a source for that?
