Alternate Fall of Rome
- Thread starter Hermanubis
- Start date
Im going to say that the Eastern Empire was destroyed by the Huns, and that the Visigoths succeded in pushing the Huns into Asia minor and took over the remnant of the Eastern Empire.
Also the Vandals must have tken a different route, perhaps they were with the Huns and kept going south once in Asia Minor, eventually succeding in taking over Egypt?
Also the Vandals must have tken a different route, perhaps they were with the Huns and kept going south once in Asia Minor, eventually succeding in taking over Egypt?
I feel somehow... used. 
Like the bit about the Vandals in Egypt. Well, I don't necessarily like it, as the Vandals were, well, destructive, and there's alot of stuff we'd rather not have destroyed in Egypt, but its original
Like the bit about the Vandals in Egypt. Well, I don't necessarily like it, as the Vandals were, well, destructive, and there's alot of stuff we'd rather not have destroyed in Egypt, but its original
The problem is not the fall of the eastern empire (which might well happen),
How do you manage to save the western empire? there should be a pod quite earlier (maybe Massentius wins against Constantinus?) to reverse the fast decline of the west. It is not just a matter of invasions, and civil wars. The difficulties of the west stem out of population reduction, and of an endemic economical crisis. When Odoacer sent the eagles to Constantinople, the empire was already dead.
How do you manage to save the western empire? there should be a pod quite earlier (maybe Massentius wins against Constantinus?) to reverse the fast decline of the west. It is not just a matter of invasions, and civil wars. The difficulties of the west stem out of population reduction, and of an endemic economical crisis. When Odoacer sent the eagles to Constantinople, the empire was already dead.
I've done at least 2 ones just like this.Hermanubis said:
In the first one, Aetius manages to play the tribes against each other better, and gets them to go east, for the most part. Especially the Ostrogoths and Huns. The Franks go into Britannia, and the Vandals and Visigoths keep fighting over Hispania until the Romans can take them out.
The second one has Alaric taking Constantinople, destabalizing the east.
Thats what it looks like you have going here, btw. The Goths take Constantinople, and grab a good chunk of the Eastern Empire. Not sure what the Huns are doing in Anatolia, but they manage to take a bite out of the conquests. The Persians invade while things are hectic and the Vandals join in the fun. The Goths eventually split up.
Religiously, you've got the Aryan Vandals ruling over the Monophysite Egyptians. Not a tenable situation, as it were. The Patriarchs might head to Rome for refuge from the heretics, strengthening the power of the Pope.
Last edited:
Ah, sorry, I hadn’t seen them…DominusNovus said:I've done at least 2 ones just like this.
In the first one, Aetius manages to play the tribes against each other better, and gets them to go east, for the most part. Especially the Ostrogoths and Huns. The Franks go into Britannia, and the Vandals and Visigoths keep fighting over Hispania until the Romans can take them out.
The second one has Alaric taking Constantinople, destabalizing the east.
Don't worry about it, but check out my assessment of yours.Hermanubis said:Ah, sorry, I hadn’t seen them…
Seems about right…DominusNovus said:
What do you think is going to happen with this?
The Romans are going to have to rely on others to do their fighting. I'm seeing serious alliances with the Burgundians and the Basques, to help against any Frankish incursions. The Lombards might head down to Pannonia (Yugoslavia). The Romans might let them, to help set up a buffer state between them and the Goths.Hermanubis said:
I really don't know why the Huns are in Anatolia, but they'll likely get crushed between the Gothic states, which I expect to unite eventually, under Persian pressure.
Depending on the circumstances of the fall of the Eastern Empire, Christianity may look much different, due to a variety of circumstances. The Schism, though 500 years off at this point, is less likely, IMO, with the Patriarchs hudled around the Bishop of Rome for protection. Augustine might never write the City of God, as Rome might not have been sacked. Depending on how the Goths treat Constantinople, maybe it will be written.
With the Vandals in possesion of the Holy Land and Egypt, they'd better be very open minded in matters of religious tolerance. They managed to have a couple rulers that pulled it off in OTL, until they pissed the Catholics off right around the time Belisarius was campaigning. It'll be harder in TTL, as the Copts are even more different.
I expect a steady Coptic diaspora to the surrounding regions, especially Axum. Perhaps the Coptic Patriarch (or whatever his title is) goes into refuge there. Of course, they'll probably travel by sea, and make a few stops in Arabia. They're be proselytizing, of course, among the pagans. Islam is likely nixed. A new branch of Christianity, maybe, but as Islam is similar to Arianism, and Monophytism is about as far from Arianism as possible, it won't look like Islam at all. Perhaps the Arabs will launch a Crusade/Jihad against the Vandals, if they ever treat the Copts poorly enough. Or maybe the Axumites will do it. Maybe Rome, or the Goths (if they convert to Catholicism soon enough). Hell, maybe even Persia. Regardless of who takes them out, I don't see the Vandals lasting more than a century.
As for the Franks and Britain, I don't know. I'd like to see the Britons survive against the Saxons. Maybe the Saxons for some reason to into Gaul? I'd like to see the Franks get taken down a few pegs. Saxony on the Seine, anyone?
Hermanubis said:
Well, the others have covered the ways how it could have gotten to this point pretty well, so, presuming that it is the East, and not the West that fell pretty much the same way the Western Empire fell in OTL, here are some thoughts...
First of all, the Gothic kingdom in the Balkans/Smyrna could be the nominal Roman vassal (albeit practically independent), very much like Ostrogothic Italy in OTL. The Goths were much better empire builders than the Huns, even if they did not quite have much luck in facing the challenges they had to endure in OTL, so it would be reasonable for them to eventually assimilate and/or incorporate the Huns, who in OTL could never create sufficiently organized states that would last past the deaths of their creators.
I would agree with earlier assessment that the Ostrogoths and Visigoths would probably end up eventually banding together, unless Rome gets its Justinian equivalent first. I would imagine that Romans would look towards Constantinople as the place to go to for eventual reconquest, if only due to its symbolic significance as the capital of Saint Constantine, and due to variety of Greek refugees and whatnot inciting them to do so.
The problem with Roman reconquest is that the Western Empire may not quite possess the resources to do so - however, they are likely to employ many mercenaries from the Franks, and other germanic tribes. Just like in OTL, the Vandals might have problems getting along with their subject, and thus any reconquest would probably begin there. A more interesting alternative would be if the Persians get there first, as the Sassanids were usually quick to recognize an opportunity if one presented itself, and strife-ridden Vandal Egypt would be a perfect prize for an ambitious Shahanshah.
In all likelihood, the Roman reconquest would only succeed as far as bringing Greece, Thrace, and Smyrna back into the fold, as the Persians are in a better position to take Egypt, and to expand into the Anatolian interior. If they (Romans) do take Constantinople, they will be faced with the problem of having territory near an ambitious, powerful, and resourceful enemy with designs of his own, and thus might have to create an Eastern Emperor simply to deal with the threat, resulting in another splintering of the Empires.
Gaul might end up being this Rome's "Bulgaria", in a sense that every few generations, an Emperor might have the ambition of being a new Caesar, and reconquering old borders in Gaul, with varying results. The Roman powerbase has major manpower problem that might be partially rectified through refugees from Vandal and Persian-controlled areas, which might result in partial "Greekification" of Italy - however, unlike the Byzantine Emperors of OTL, they would not have to deal with many of the legitimacy issues of Byzantium in OTL medieval Christendom (as in "what do you mean you are the Roman Empire? You don't even possess Rome, nor do you even speak Latin, and you are a heretic on the top of all that!"), as they still have Rome, and are still a major power in Western Europe.
With this scenario, the rise of Islam proper is unlikely, however, since the population pressures of the Arabian peninsula are still there as in OTL, the Arabic invasion is still likely to happen roughly around the same time as OTL, within roughly 50 years of it. In such scenario, Egypt would be relatively easy prey for the Arabs, no matter who holds it, as it is far from both Roman and Persian power bases, and the Vandals are expected to act as in OTL, and seen by the locals as occupiers at best.
Where the Arab invasion goes next is anyone's guess, and it depends on whether or not their opponents are well organized to resist them. Since there is lesser chance of total war such as Byzantine-Persian conflict, and more chance of proxy warfare, it appears that the Romans or the Persians would be able to contain the Arabs to Egypt and Arabia proper, where they would become a powerful third player in the Mediterranean politics.
The last wave of great migrations should still hit between VIth and IXth centuries, so the Slavs are still likely to head towards the Balkans, which might provide better opportunities for easy pickings than in OTL. Thus we might even see the Constantinople-centered Slav Empire at some point in TTL, conveniently serving as a buffer state between various powers.
The Franks are likely to serve as a foundation for Northern and Central European nations, which are probably going to be pretty similar to OTL's medieval France and Germany as far as ethnicities, language, and basic culture go. A particularly ambitious and successful Frank king might be able to wrestle Iberia from the Romans, although his ability to keep it might be limited due to logistics involved, and Roman resistance. If Gaul is TTL Rome's Bulgaria, Iberia might be this Rome's Greece, conquered, reconquered, and considered integral part of the Empire only to be lost again time after time.
Rome might be able to divert Lombard and other migrations to hit Gaul, allowing Romans proper to retake parts of it, although Rome's hearland and most important territories would be Italy and North Africa (OTL Tunisia), the former as political center and main source of manpower, and the latter as the breadbasket of the Empire. Spain would only be given priority IMO if North Africa is either lost or compromised, otherwise its coastal areas are the only parts the Romans are concerned about due to their need to keep control of the Western Mediterranean.
By about Xth-XIth century or so, the Magyar migration might still hit, but there are likely to be enough other nations that would contain them before Rome even gets involved. Around the same time, or even earlier, I assume the Norse migration still happens pretty much as in OTL - they might end up taking over some of the outlying Roman territories and settle in them, first as foederati, and then as independent princes, much like OTL Normans did. This might result in Slavic-Norse hybrid state ranging from OTL Kievan Rus lands well into Thrace, ruled from Constantinople, as well as Norse holdings in Spain and North Africa, wherever their longships could reach.
At the onset of XIIth century or so, Roman Empire is likely to control Italy proper, Carthage and surrounding area, southern Spain and North Africa around Gibraltar, and Morea in Greece. Frankish and Germanic kingdoms, some of Norse origin, some not, are likely to cover most of Northern and Central Europe, whereas Iberia should be a patchwork of independent states, some tributaries to greater powers (Frankish kingdom and Rome being two of those), some independent, with a kingdom or two actually able to begin the peninsula unification process.
The Persian Empire would cover Eastern Anatolia and much of the Middle East, neighbouring Arabian Egypt and Arabia proper. The remaining Gothic states are going to be in Southern Smyrna, Crete, and Cyprus, most likely as informal vassals of the Persians. Northern Smyrna, Thrace, and OTL Ukraine are going to be a possession of "Russia", the Slavic kingdom ruled from Constantinople with various Norse influences. Various other Russian states are going to cover the lands of OTL European Russia.
What do you guys think?
The Goths (probably the Huns, too) will assimilate pretty quickly, due to the high population in the east. They were relatively good conquerers in OTL, so there shouldn't be too much damage. So, they'll get Hellenized soon enough. Instead of Roderic turning into Rodriguez, it'd end up as Roderikos or something like that.Hermanubis said:
I'm guessing the west has all the Imperial Regalia now, as the east did after the fall of the west in OTL. Are the Goths ruling on behalf of the western Emperor, or in their own name? Relations between east and west might end up being good, so long as they don't try attacking each other too much. They've got plenty of pagan Barbarians, heretic Barbarians (if the Goths convert to the Catholic Orthodox creed), and Persians, to worry about.