The Carthaginian Empire would have united itself as the most impressive power in the Western Mediterranean though Rome would have been hindered from growing further, yet I assume that they actually would have had the option to do battle with the Greeks and Macedonians since there were at that point Roman powers arranged in Greece at those occasions. Nonetheless, with Rome's annihilation in the West, the Romans will be unable to grow to Spain, where they would have the majority of their future great heads.
The Celtic clans of Gaul and Spain would have grown all the more gradually when contrasted with what the Romans would have had the option to do as Roman law, foundation, organization, training, osmosis would have not been actualized. Western Europe would in any case be a savage and ignoble spot, changing like the status of the Germanic clans, continually at battle for assets.
The future Frankish, Ostrogothic,Visigothic, Lombard and Burgundian clans would have had a considerably more difficult battle in involving the spots they would possess in our course of events, yet to the extent I see it, they would've likely consolidated or acclimatized with the Celtic populace, framing a Celtic-Germanic populace as the Huns showed up.
In the East, the Parthians or the Pontic Kingdoms may have been the provincial authorities, and with Rome losing glory and spirit after their annihilation, they would have been diminished to simply strategic binds with these forces. Constantinople would in any case be Greek and Egypt would stay Ptolemaic causing the Arab Islamic triumphs to most presumably not occur on account of the immense militaries and strict impacts of these close by nations. Greek phalanxes would in any case rule the eastern Mediterranean.
Further into the future, at around 500–1000 AD Europe and the Near East would most likely be still at our current timetable at 280BC-200BC. Improvement would simply be substantially more slow. Rome had a gigantic effect no uncertainty.
Explanation:
