Alternative history

>First punic war. Rome is defeated by carthage.
>Second punic war. Rome is defeated by Carthage and Macedonia
>Later, Germanic tribes destroy Rome.

Ideas what I could do with Italy?

Lot of divided tribes all seeking the glory of "hey remember that one time we unified and were sort of successful at conquering shit? let's do that again"

Maybe the germanic pagan tribes, after conquering rome, became civilized and proceeded to unify the mediterranena just like the roman did, with the difference being the religion, the culture and the form of government (e.g. tribal federation)

Reminder that exists

This is alternative history, therefore not automatically Veeky Forums field

Have the Samnites dominate central Italy and then take over the rest eventually. Their 4 tribe Federation was the most powerful non-Roman Italian nation.

Most of their lands are in the high plateau of the southern Appenines, so they would avoid most of the destruction of those wars. They gave Rome the greatest threat on Italy and almost destroyed Rome in 82bc at the Battle of the Colline Gates.

The Legio Linteata (The Linen Legion) was a military division of Samnite soldiers bound by religious oath that numbered up to 20,000 soldiers.

Samnites created Manipular tactics and could easily dominate in Romes absence.

Ruled by the Medix Teutatis (like a Roman Consul but there is only one). Regions were ruled by Medix and towns were ruled by a Pagus.

In this alternate history, quests are still on Veeky Forums

Not an expert on Roman history, but I'll try to keep things plausible.
>First punic war. Rome is defeated by carthage.
This was mostly fought over Sicily, right? Instead of Rome taking possession of Carthaginian Sicily, Carthage takes possession of Roman Sicily. This now means Carthage not only possesses a very fertile island (I think it was responsible for most domestically produced Roman grain until Egypt was conquered), but also has even more naval bases close to the Italian peninsula (other than Corsica and Sardinia). A big victory for Carthage with Rome's navy probably severely weakened, but nothing huge.

>Second punic war. Rome is defeated by Carthage and Macedonia
You infer an alliance with Macedon, which would make sense. Macedon would probably want to expand South into Greece, and would have a shared interest as Carthage would want to take a break from fighting Rome to conquer Syracuse and complete their dominance over Sicily. After that, why not turn on Rome? Carthage would probably also have Gallic allies in this instance. This would possibly mean that Carthage's allies can invade from the North while Carthage uses its superior navy (Carthage won the first punic war, remember?) to do some landings in the south. Now Hannibal actually has the numbers, allies and not-fucked position of his country to actually knock down Rome's gates.

Your implication that Germanic tribes destroy Rome means Rome is still around. This could take multiple forms, but I think the form that actually has Rome "surviving" would be to break up Roman Italia into varying smaller city-states among which Rome would "merely" be the most powerful rather than the overlord. Italia would be fractured, Macedonia would dominate the Eastern Mediterranean and Carthage the West. Perhaps the utter south of the boot of Italy would be annexed by Carthage, and all the splinterstates of former Roman Italia forced into alliances/vassalage to Carthage.
cont.

>Germanic tribes destroy Rome
Now we're almost certainly centuries into the future, as the Germanic tribes had no real interest in Italia. This is the biggest wildcard, because we need centuries of history to fill the gap. These are some questions you may want to answer:
>After the fall of Italia, what happens to Gaul? Can Carthage produce a "Caesar" who annexes Gaul, or does Gaul simply remain an ally to Carthage because there's nothing of real worth there (Rome's wealth historically always came from the East Mediterranean, Hispania and sort of the Maghreb. Gaul and Britannia weren't worth all that much)
>What happens to Macedon? Does its go its own way? Remain friendly to Carthage? Does war break out between the two?
>How far does Carthage expand?
>Without Caesar to intervene, how does the attempt of the Germanians to cross the Rhine go, with what consequences?
and finally
>Given the aforementioned bilateral treaties between the Italian city states and Carthage, would Carthage be prompted to aid Rome or drop them like they're hot because they're no longer useful?
This is the most difficult question. The further alternate history moves away from the Point of Deviation, the more unpredictable it gets.

Why is alternate history always either something happens with Rome or the Nazis win? Do something different you shitters.

Everyone wants the good guys to win

What if the Nazis were Romans?

Seems likely that carthage would come to completely dominate Syracuse and the remaining Roman peninsula. What was pretty much the reason for the punic wars in the first place

Unless Carthage underwent significant military and government reform, it would have been unable to win agaisnt Rome in the long run.

Additionaly, it would make more sense if Gauls destroyed Rome, not Germans.

>Germanic tribes

Dude, you dun goofed, but at least use the Gauls.

Anyway Carthage+Macedonia colonize southern Italy. Duh.

Well I don't think Carthage would be so quick to take over Syracuse. It was the strongest, and wealthiest city-state at the time, a splendor of Greek civilization and very important to them. Syracuse would have broken their alliance with Rome and would have courted Carthage after Rome was defeated. Macedonia would also take advantage of Rome's defeat, and wouldn't have to worry about them during their take over of the Greek peninsula.

You see Macedonia was moving to take over the leftover states in the Aegean, Sparta being the first, and then Athens. They likely would have moved their army to Caria which they already owned, and built their strategy around taking out the last islands still independent.

But with Rome gone, the Macedonians can very likely take control of the southern greek cities, that would have revolted and easily assemble into their kingdom if not declare independence and join them as client states.

So now, Syracuse would see the way of the tides and ally with Macedonia, a major Greek power that can protect them. With Massilia to the north, and greek settlements in Spain being pressured by Carthage, it would only make sense for Macedonia switch its geopolitical focus and try to take the fertile land of the west instead of dealing with the east where two powerful Kingdoms already existed and fought.

So I think you'll find that the Italians would be left behind the scenes, they could reform, or ally with the two powers, or simply stay out of it and try and create their own prosperous city-states. Primitives/tribesmen are easily controlled, as shown with Massilia lasting so damn long and only ever being assimilated into Rome.

Who would be the victor of Macedonia vs Carthage? Well I don't think the Macedonians had the naval heritage to exactly destroy Carthage like the Romans did, neither the will and despise to do so. There would be a lot of petty conflicts around Sicily until Macedonia fell to internal conflict.

Carthagenian Pope blesses this thread.

It probably would not matter. Rome got plundered every other generation or so IRL already.

>every other generation or so
The last time after Brennus (4th century BC) was under Honorius (4th century AD). Most countries in Europe laster shorter than the time between those two pillagings.

>>First punic war. Rome is defeated by carthage.
Col cazzo, amico.

Just for you: What if none of the papal lines in the western schism ended, but the church below the papacy kept up the pretense of unification for as long as possible?

North of Italy is ruled by germanic tribes.
Medieterran is fully under Carthage dominion

Give it to the Saracens, stage some sort of "Reconquista" like El Cid in Spain.
...BUT this Reconquista isn't done by Italians, rather France or the HRE.
So later on you can have Italians siding with the Arabs to defend from the Northern occupation, or side with the Christians to defend from the Muslims.
A bit like the Pope vs Emperor dispute in real history, but with Saracens on one side and the Emperor or the King of France (or Aragon?) on the other.

Wildcards: the Pope, Venice, Byzantines.


Or, hey, have Belisar succeed in his expedition, that's a different take.
Or give it fully to OstroGoths or Lombards.

Underrated hystorical accurate post

Bravo!

No Roman Empire means no christianity

It could still be a small cult around Rome.

Or it could have taken Carthage by storm just like it did the Roman Empire.

I am for Buddhist europe.

Or the Confederates. Americans have a super hardon for ACW PODs.

If we're talking Hellenistic Era, how about Phyrrus? He had the opportunity to properly conquer Macedon completely but left the pretender alive and well on the coast. Had he snapped up all of Macedon and consolidated it properly, he might have had the manpower to cajole the lazy ingrates who were the Greeks of Italy and Sicily. Carthage was a fairly ripe target if he had just toppled Lilybaeum.

After Carthage fell, maybe he'd have the manpower to match the Romans?

Did the Samnites have the same kind of socio-political structure that gave Rome the resilience, manpower and mustering ability that led them to beat their foes in the Hellenistic Era?

If not, I don't think the Samnites could have filled the imperial shoes of Rome beyond Italy