3rd century collapse of the Empire

Faeelin

Banned
OTL Aurelian managed to reunify the Empire in the 260's and 270's. Suppose that he died in 240 or so.

Would the western empire, without being bound to rome, be capable of beating back the barbarians? Or is it too weak on its own, and it is the alemanni who take paris?
 
Atthis stage the Germanic tribes aren't ready yet to conquer territory. They may learn in a hurry, but their organisation is more akin to that of the 8th/early 9th century vikings than that of the later tribal kingships. I don't expect them to take Paris the way Clovis did. Then again, they may well take Paris like the Goths did Ephesos... plundering raids ranging as far as North Africa and Italy are easily imaginable.

If the imperial power structure comes down in 260, there will still be viable city-states around inthe west. That may lead to a more urbanised, more 'Spainlike' civilisation growing on the ruins with landowners running their estates as absentees and living in defensible cities. The military structure, too, may survive in rudiments. My guess is the first guy to work out how to hitch the barbarians to his chariot ends up running the region. Of course, given how enotionally close the ruling classes still were to the old Empire, I am sure the new rulers would begin calling themselves Caesar Augustus in no time flat and start claiming overlordship.

An interesting issue is the almost totzal absence of Christianity in the western priovinces at this point. In the East, there were some rural Christian communities and a viableinfrastructure, but in the west, Christianity was almost completely limited to cities as yet. Even overall, you can't expect more than 5-10% Christians - probably not enough to create the overarching link that Christendom provided later. Syncretistic paganism is good at integrating, but its records at creating group identity is mixed. Without the backing of an emperor, the psychological boost of being linked with the resurgence of the 4th century, and the imperial infrastructure, I doubt there will be a unfied Christianity. Even is it does triumph (which is not that unlikely - the social dynamics of early Christianity were ideally suited to thedestruction of polytheistic societies) it will probably be in small sects asnd radically different practices. Still, I think it more likely that it will die. After all, there are now more than enough pissed-off pagans convinced that it's all the Christians' and Jews' fault...) No Christianity likely means no Islam, and may mean no Judaism as we know it - especially if the Jews take back Jerusalem and manage to set up a new Judaea. Any local powermonger in control of Egypt may gladly pay that as the price for the support of the Jews of Alexandria...

I see this somewhere between a return to Hellenism and the Chinese pattern. Someone will declare himself emperor, and most powermongers will reference themselves to the Roman Empire, so the question is, will any emperor be strong enough to pull the whole caboodle together?

I don't expect an eastern Empire to lead the resurgence, BTW. this is the second generation of the Sassanid family in power. Their ideology is pretty clear about an Achaemenid restoration, which means as far as they are concerned, Syria, Anatolia, and Egypt are theirs. That doesn't mean they can make it stick, but a weakened Rome will certainly make it look tempting.

Italy, the Balkans, North Africa, Greece and Spain are our best candidates for safe havens. Interesting...
 

Faeelin

Banned
I'm confused. Why wouldn't the factors that led to the decilne of western cities OTL occur here as well?
 
Faeelin said:
I'm confused. Why wouldn't the factors that led to the decilne of western cities OTL occur here as well?

They would, but the constellation could turn out differently. The elitres left the cities largely because

- living in cities made you more easily taxable (councillors were jointly liable for all expected revenues)

- the city government held no more interest for the ambitious (especially once the governors kept interfering)

- the dominant culture went towards overseeing your estates in bucolic luxury.

IOW, they wanted to enjoy the stability the empire brought without paying for its upkeep, and they got away with it. If this has not yet happened come crunchtime, cities look more attractive to the power elites:

- they're defensible

- they're foci of government (without comites or bishops to usurp the powers and landlords to run the countryside, the cities could stay administrative centres for longer)

- living in the countryside isn't half as nice if you have to perpetually look over your shoulder for barbarian raiders

So I guess if the cities are left in the 260s rather than the 420s, they will retain a more discrete and stronger identity. i don't see them continuing in old vigour (no way will Trier keep 40.000odd inhabitants), but they'll probably stay a little more populated and wealthy.
 
Top