Caesar Biden
Banned
When people think of the Roman Empire at the turn of the 7th century, they often get a very specific image in their head: an overstretched, financially strained giant, beset on all sides by foes due to indefensible borders and wracked by internal religious division. A paper tiger, some might say. Even those being kind would describe it as a difficult beast to manage.
But I think that's being a bit unfair to Rome, which had survived far worse than this. While it suffered from numerous problems, there was no reason to assume that all of these would add up to cause the whole Empire's ruin and lead down a path that would eventually lead to losing everything outside of Anatolia and parts of the Balkans and Italy. In OTL, they were dealt a very bad hand, from the end of Maurice's reign all the way to the dazzlingly successful Arab Conquests. But there's no reason an alt-7th century would necessarily have to go the same way, or even similarly.
Roman Empire at the turn of the century
In order to have a much better 7th Century for Rome, we really need to go back to the beginning of their unceasing troubles-the rise of Phocas. Now, Phocas is an interesting figure, and I do believe he has been unfairly demonized. Yes, he was brutal, and yes, he was ambitious, but so was everyone in his position, and he had his reasons for revolting. But regardless of his justification, his usurpation of the Imperial Throne completely destroyed the unbroken chain of peaceful succession that had been in existence for over 100 years as this point, and led to a series of events that would be counterproductive to my goal here. So we need to avoid this.
For decades, really, the Romans have been at war with the Slavs and Avars over the Balkans*. By 602, however, the Romans finally have the upper hand. Thanks to smart policy on the part of Maurice, clever tactics on the part of Priscus, and above all the experience and discipline of the Danubian Army, the Romans have finally gone north of the Danube and have decisively defeated several Slavic and Avar armies. Slavic settlers have mostly pulled out of the Balkans at this point, and the Danube frontier is fairly secure.
But upkeep remains a major issue for Maurice. In order to pay for this army that's won so many victories, as well as to fortify the East and just generally keep the Empire and its allies together, Maurice has had to be very careful about the Imperial economy. Taxes are already high, and he's not about to go into debt or deplete what little gold the Empire has left. So he decides to cut some funds to the army by ordering it to winter over the Danube.
In theory, this shouldn't be that big of a deal for the army, as the Slavs in the area they would winter in have been more or less pacified. But this isn't the first time he's been at odds with the Danubian army, and they revolt. Phocas becomes their new leader, and they start issuing demands, specifically for Maurice to abdicate as Emperor.
In addition to all of this, Maurice isn't exactly loved by the Roman people themselves. They've been living under high taxes for a while now, and wouldn't really mind a change in the establishment. Meanwhile Maurice doesn't really have an army he can raise anywhere near him that can match up to the professional force that is the army of the Danube.
IOTL, Maurice fleed the city, Phocas crowned himself, and later Maurice and all his sons were killed in the countryside. This led to war with the Persians, a breakdown of the Danubian front, economic and political displacement, and many other bad things for the Romans. So how do we get out of this standoff and keep Rome at peace? The answer is deceptively simple. Maurice has to die.
Now, I would feel bad about giving one of the better Roman Emperors an inglorious end, but considering Maurice's OTL fate, I'm sure he would thank me if he could. It won't be that hard to do: Apparently, he was suffering from gout at the time, and he wasn't exactly young anymore (He was 63). So the stress of the situation killing him is by no means inconceivable.
So what happens next? Well, Phocas is at this point on his way to Constantinople, and he has presented two Imperial candidates he and the Danubian Army will accept: Theodosius, who's Maurice's eldest son and already Caesar, or Germanus, a general and Senator. Considering how suddenly Maurice has died ITTL, and how pressured those in Constantinople would be by the oncoming advance of Phocas, it's probably safe to assume that Theodosius had a better chance of being elevated to the purple.
So now a newly-christened Theodosius III, who is only 19, now has the unenviable task to calm down Phocas. He'll be able to do so, but he'll have to concede quite a bit: Phocas will of course want to keep his new position as head of the Danubian army, the army itself will want a pay raise rather than a pay cut that Maurice wanted to give them, and they'll make damn sure that they're not ordered to winter North of the Danube again**. They're not very good terms from Theodosius' perspective, but he doesn't really have much of a choice. Any armies that can help him are miles and miles away, spread out in Italy, North Africa, and the border with Persia. Honestly, he's just relieved that this Phocas guy wasn't mad enough to try to take the Throne for himself. That sure would've been a nightmare.
Phocas and the Danubian army return to the Danube. When fall fades into winter next time, they winter in Northern Thrace.
Meanwhile, Theodosius III has many, many problems in Constantinople. From an almost empty treasury to political dissent, this new reign won't be easy. But we can at least be sure that Rome isn't going to have to suffer a civil war when it needs a period to recover.
*: Yes, I know that's the Arabic word for it and not what the Romans would call it, but for the sake of simplicity I'm going to be using the term "Balkans".
**: I want to be clear this doesn't include fighting over the Danube. Soldiers love that, because more often than not they end up with a lot of slaves and loot.
I'm not really considering this thread as a TL. It's a discussion about a Roman Empire that gets a breather in the early 7th century, and what I'm going to write to continue this will be fairly broad, basic and concise, only dealing with a few decades of time. There are some amazing TLs out there about a chaotic Late Antiquity, where Rome expands like a juggernaut and suffers good times and bad. This is not one of them. The premise is more boring- avoiding a time of excitement and bloodshed and instead focusing on making sure a state lasts.
I'd be interested to hear any criticisms or thoughts on the matter. Is there anything I've written so far that is implausible or jumps out at you? Do you have concerns about the Roman economy or military situation that you think won't just be fixed by avoiding a civil war?
I hope to develop this scenario a little bit more, and criticisms mean I can make this scenario more realistic and possibly interesting. I'm not trying to create a Roman-wank here- I just want to set up a scenario where the transition from Late Antiquity to the Medieval Era is more smooth, and the older powers (Rome and Persia specifically) survive and evolve into new times without being nearly broken or destroyed altogether.
But I think that's being a bit unfair to Rome, which had survived far worse than this. While it suffered from numerous problems, there was no reason to assume that all of these would add up to cause the whole Empire's ruin and lead down a path that would eventually lead to losing everything outside of Anatolia and parts of the Balkans and Italy. In OTL, they were dealt a very bad hand, from the end of Maurice's reign all the way to the dazzlingly successful Arab Conquests. But there's no reason an alt-7th century would necessarily have to go the same way, or even similarly.
Roman Empire at the turn of the century
In order to have a much better 7th Century for Rome, we really need to go back to the beginning of their unceasing troubles-the rise of Phocas. Now, Phocas is an interesting figure, and I do believe he has been unfairly demonized. Yes, he was brutal, and yes, he was ambitious, but so was everyone in his position, and he had his reasons for revolting. But regardless of his justification, his usurpation of the Imperial Throne completely destroyed the unbroken chain of peaceful succession that had been in existence for over 100 years as this point, and led to a series of events that would be counterproductive to my goal here. So we need to avoid this.
For decades, really, the Romans have been at war with the Slavs and Avars over the Balkans*. By 602, however, the Romans finally have the upper hand. Thanks to smart policy on the part of Maurice, clever tactics on the part of Priscus, and above all the experience and discipline of the Danubian Army, the Romans have finally gone north of the Danube and have decisively defeated several Slavic and Avar armies. Slavic settlers have mostly pulled out of the Balkans at this point, and the Danube frontier is fairly secure.
But upkeep remains a major issue for Maurice. In order to pay for this army that's won so many victories, as well as to fortify the East and just generally keep the Empire and its allies together, Maurice has had to be very careful about the Imperial economy. Taxes are already high, and he's not about to go into debt or deplete what little gold the Empire has left. So he decides to cut some funds to the army by ordering it to winter over the Danube.
In theory, this shouldn't be that big of a deal for the army, as the Slavs in the area they would winter in have been more or less pacified. But this isn't the first time he's been at odds with the Danubian army, and they revolt. Phocas becomes their new leader, and they start issuing demands, specifically for Maurice to abdicate as Emperor.
In addition to all of this, Maurice isn't exactly loved by the Roman people themselves. They've been living under high taxes for a while now, and wouldn't really mind a change in the establishment. Meanwhile Maurice doesn't really have an army he can raise anywhere near him that can match up to the professional force that is the army of the Danube.
IOTL, Maurice fleed the city, Phocas crowned himself, and later Maurice and all his sons were killed in the countryside. This led to war with the Persians, a breakdown of the Danubian front, economic and political displacement, and many other bad things for the Romans. So how do we get out of this standoff and keep Rome at peace? The answer is deceptively simple. Maurice has to die.
Now, I would feel bad about giving one of the better Roman Emperors an inglorious end, but considering Maurice's OTL fate, I'm sure he would thank me if he could. It won't be that hard to do: Apparently, he was suffering from gout at the time, and he wasn't exactly young anymore (He was 63). So the stress of the situation killing him is by no means inconceivable.
So what happens next? Well, Phocas is at this point on his way to Constantinople, and he has presented two Imperial candidates he and the Danubian Army will accept: Theodosius, who's Maurice's eldest son and already Caesar, or Germanus, a general and Senator. Considering how suddenly Maurice has died ITTL, and how pressured those in Constantinople would be by the oncoming advance of Phocas, it's probably safe to assume that Theodosius had a better chance of being elevated to the purple.
So now a newly-christened Theodosius III, who is only 19, now has the unenviable task to calm down Phocas. He'll be able to do so, but he'll have to concede quite a bit: Phocas will of course want to keep his new position as head of the Danubian army, the army itself will want a pay raise rather than a pay cut that Maurice wanted to give them, and they'll make damn sure that they're not ordered to winter North of the Danube again**. They're not very good terms from Theodosius' perspective, but he doesn't really have much of a choice. Any armies that can help him are miles and miles away, spread out in Italy, North Africa, and the border with Persia. Honestly, he's just relieved that this Phocas guy wasn't mad enough to try to take the Throne for himself. That sure would've been a nightmare.
Phocas and the Danubian army return to the Danube. When fall fades into winter next time, they winter in Northern Thrace.
Meanwhile, Theodosius III has many, many problems in Constantinople. From an almost empty treasury to political dissent, this new reign won't be easy. But we can at least be sure that Rome isn't going to have to suffer a civil war when it needs a period to recover.
*: Yes, I know that's the Arabic word for it and not what the Romans would call it, but for the sake of simplicity I'm going to be using the term "Balkans".
**: I want to be clear this doesn't include fighting over the Danube. Soldiers love that, because more often than not they end up with a lot of slaves and loot.
I'm not really considering this thread as a TL. It's a discussion about a Roman Empire that gets a breather in the early 7th century, and what I'm going to write to continue this will be fairly broad, basic and concise, only dealing with a few decades of time. There are some amazing TLs out there about a chaotic Late Antiquity, where Rome expands like a juggernaut and suffers good times and bad. This is not one of them. The premise is more boring- avoiding a time of excitement and bloodshed and instead focusing on making sure a state lasts.
I'd be interested to hear any criticisms or thoughts on the matter. Is there anything I've written so far that is implausible or jumps out at you? Do you have concerns about the Roman economy or military situation that you think won't just be fixed by avoiding a civil war?
I hope to develop this scenario a little bit more, and criticisms mean I can make this scenario more realistic and possibly interesting. I'm not trying to create a Roman-wank here- I just want to set up a scenario where the transition from Late Antiquity to the Medieval Era is more smooth, and the older powers (Rome and Persia specifically) survive and evolve into new times without being nearly broken or destroyed altogether.