AHC/WI: Germanic and Slavic,etc Dynasties of the Undivided Roman Empire

[Albert.Nik]

Beyond the 3rd and the 4th Century,Roman Empire was repeatedly bombarded with Germanic Invaders and maybe some of Non-Germanic origin in Eastern Europe as well. In this timeline,instead of fighting them,Rome decides to negotiate with them. The lands of Germanic peoples,Balto-Slavic people and the Scythians are incorporated into the Empire. Instead,they are given good power to rule and build up their own Romes all of which would be represented to the Greater Rome in Italy. Power sharing agreements are signed off for this huge territories which now extends up to Central Asia and Scandinavia. A Mega Roman Empire with a new Golden Age is born. Population increases steadily. Rome is now seeking treaties/agreements with Persia who now,will not dare to attack Rome which is so strong. The Empire is multilingual with Germanic,Slavic,Scythian,Middle Eastern,Greek,Semitic,Coptic,Caucasian,Celtic,etc. People interested learn others languages. Nobody in Europe and Roman Empire is treated as Barbarian. A new Monotheistic religion is formed taking all attractive elements of all the religions like how Zoroastrianism was formed and this would be an ethnic cum Universalizing religion with principles of flourishing ones own ethnicity(European/Caucasian) first but should welcome others willing to assimilate very well. Now,how would Tocharians who lived at the easternmost edge of Europe near Central Asia initially react to new settlers who look like them but speak a language like those they had never heard of(Germanic North/West/East,Latin,etc) till now? I dont think any Augustus like Emperor would not desire annexing Tarim Basin and parts of West China as well. So eventually,there might be a Tocharian dynasty and Western Iranian Dynasties as well and their mythology elements would enter the religion as well. So how would this successful Empire go into modern days? An advanced Greater Europe and the ME? Earlier colonization of Americas? Colonization of Eurasian steppes? How would the Modern world look like?

 

[Albert.Nik]

Note: I deliberately left out the Armenians,Anatolians and the Semitic origin emperors. We all know that they were very established into the Roman empire in OTL already.

 

[SpaceRome]

Beyond the 3rd and the 4th Century,Roman Empire was repeatedly bombarded with Germanic Invaders and maybe some of Non-Germanic origin in Eastern Europe as well. In this timeline,instead of fighting them,Rome decides to negotiate with them. The lands of Germanic peoples,Balto-Slavic people and the Scythians are incorporated into the Empire. Instead,they are given good power to rule and build up their own Romes all of which would be represented to the Greater Rome in Italy

why would the Romans ever negotiate with the Germans? in their eyes, the Germans were both utterly barbaric (true for the most part) and TERRIFYING (also true for the most part). Romans only negotiated with these peoples when there was an immense power imbalance for either side - either the Romans totally outclassed the Germans, or they were too weak to resist anything imposed on them. also, there was almost zero contact with the balto-slavs (the first major interaction between both of them was, arguably, the first bulgarian empire in the 7th century). there is no simple PoD for this, as the romans would never cooperate with the uncivilized masses in the east, and the barbarians will never have the coordination to make such a treaty. how would that even work? you can't exactly convince the entire slavic, germanic and scythic populations to willingly join an empire which they haven't heard of, or hated/fought for their entire life.

but EVEN IF you assume that an ASB makes all of these different peoples (who will absolutely not unite under the idea of a "greater rome", we aren't talking about HRE-era germans), the empire you're describing will fall apart in days. the region beyond the rhine was undeveloped, heavily forested and non-urbanized, which would make any grecco-roman form of government impossible unless major reforms are made to this vast area BEFORE the treaty (in which case, we are referring to such a different world from our own that the PoD required to produce would have to be somewhere before the founding of the city). also, the germanic tribes (even in the 5th century), and definitely the balto-slavs, were simply not as organised on a societal level as the romans - the simple fact they were tribes until settling in roman territories should make this obvious. why would a 'civilized' roman or greek agree to share power with a barbaric, tribal german tribe living a thousand kilometers from him? besides, an empire in the size you're describing would collapse almost immediatly, or fracture - why even fake alligence to the capital in rome when your tribe is right here?

the closest thing to this proposal which would be plausible in any way is a germanic dynasty ruling the entire western roman empire - which would still be very unlikely, but not completely impossible like this.

p.s: in your post, you've neglected to mention a small, little known civilization known as axum (y'know, just the most powerful and civilized place in the west outside of the roman empire) while talking about how a roman scandinavia will be plausible. Are they not european/caucasian enough for this multi-ethnic roman empire?

 

[Arkenfolm]

The Germanic and Slavic peoples did negotiate with Rome. It just so happened it usually ended up with thousands of them settling in Roman lands and by the 5th century, mostly answering to their own kings instead when they weren't intervening in Roman politics to prop up their own emperors.

And it's never in human nature to just surrender your power for no reason. What does Slavomir the Slavic king get out of it if the Roman Emperor can tell him how to rule his tribe? Other than that he now gets a say in how Rome is ran, which in turn will offend the Romans, because why do they want some dirty savage telling them what to do? That's not worth getting Slavomir's fiefdom of a few villages, and a few hundred people and animals to join the Roman Empire. And that in turn will annoy other tribal elites, since they were already getting everything they wanted from Rome via trade. Why do they want Roman rule now?

 

[LSCatilina]

Beyond the 3rd and the 4th Century,Roman Empire was repeatedly bombarded with Germanic Invaders

That's rather the Vth century you're describing, with groups of Barbarians moving and settling on their own, after negotiating or forcing their way, in Roman provinces. But for the IIIrd and IVth centuries, Barbarians essentially raided down Roman provinces and rarely settled as whole peoples except peripheral regions (Decumate Fields, Dacia) that got abandoned or in the latter part in actually negotiated treaties (as Goths in Moesia, Franks in Toxandria, possibly Saxons in the Saxon Shore).

Rome decides to negotiate with them. The lands of Germanic peoples,

It's pretty much what Romans did : confronted to whole confederations that raided its provinces, they didn't just resorted to military opposition (they lacked the capacity to do that systematically anyway, due to Persian pressure) but managed to pass treaties with Barbarians (rather than "Germanic" which is a bit of an anachronism) on a relatively good position giving the situation.
It took various forms, such as settlement of Barbarians as laeti (which was a practice, coming from the Augustean period in some early form, of settling whole bands/tribes in roman provinces as military and/or productive workforce), clientelisation, mercenariship and by the late IVth century and especially the Vth century treaties of federation which greatly differed from the other ones by the fact Barbarians obtained regional and territorial autonomy : this happened because Rome negotiated less and less in a good standing.

Power sharing agreements are signed off for this huge territories which now extends up to Central Asia and Scandinavia.

You forget an important factor : what did Barbarians wanted out of Rome. It was not they wanted to compete with Romania as a state and have the freedom to build their own Rome, they wanted in a context of climatic change (which significantly limited autonomous ressource-gathering in Barbaricum and increased economical dependency trough subsides or raiding) to move down in Romania as migrants/raiders at least for what matter limes peoples.
It's not like, either, Romans had not tought intervening politically with Barbaricum : the whole chiefdom-building there was heavily dependent form Roman interaction, would it be trough trade (especially on metals and grain), subsides, alliances (we know Romans sent "military advisors" as far as Poland) and direct interventions.

It's just that creating "others Rome" interested no one, especially not Barbarians.

Population increases steadily.

I doubt that. Romania faced a constant lack of manpower and workforce in its provinces, at least in the western and central ones, which is exactly why they resorted to Barbarian settlement in a large scale enough from the late IIIrd century onward for their military and productive need. You somehow manage to blockade Barbarian groups moving in, you make the problem worse.

The Empire is multilingual with Germanic,Slavic,Scythian,Middle Eastern,Greek,Semitic,Coptic,Caucasian,Celtic,etc. People interested learn others languages. Nobody in Europe and Roman Empire is treated as Barbarian.

You would definitely need something else to make that happened. Latin and Greek were the basic language of the European superpower, any other being provincial at best, Barbarian at worst and steadily declining as soon as it could happen. See, the distinction between Roman and Barbarian wasn't just something prejudiced that with good will and understanding and living together could be dealt with, it was a basic identitarian feature of Roman society : Romans were people living under and with the Roman state with a whole set of rights and clear duties; when Barbarians were defined by the absence of these and the more or less arbitrary rule of a petty-king.
One could jump categories (Romans joining up with Barbarians, Barbarians obtaining Roman citizenship) but the "stigma" of having Barbarian origin never really went off just as it happened with Stilicho and, at least for what mattered Roman warlords, Ricimer.
The sheer weight of Roman culture as not just a language but as well institution, was so important that Barbarians IOTL switched really quickly to bilinguism, diglossy and eventually Latin monolinguism in less than one century after their definitive settlement. Being integrated into Roman state apparatus implies a cultural assymetrical relationship even if the political balance is more favorable to Barbarians.

 

[Albert.Nik]

@LSCatilina Initially,the Roman Empire was formed and grown with such tribes itself(Italo-Celtic people who migrated into the Peninsula founded the Roman Empire). Even emperors of Non Roman origin were plenty like Elagabalus,Septumis,Phillip,etc and I think there might have even been Gaulish Emperors. What changed at the time of Stillico? Why did it get opposite?

 

[Albert.Nik]

Anything to do with Crisis of the Third Century,Tetrarchy or new religions coming in?

 

[LSCatilina]

@LSCatilina Initially,the Roman Empire was formed and grown with such tribes itself(Italo-Celtic people who migrated into the Peninsula founded the Roman Empire).

Not really : early Roman republic was basically a regional league of related peoples (namely, Latins) and it grew from it into a regional confederation dominated by Rome. Provincial peoples played no real role before they were integrated into Roman state apparatus : it took a lot of times usually (the Social War is essentially the reaction of Italian allies facing non-integration) and went trough more or less slow elite assimilation (and not partnership in the main sense) of provincial elites, some of them that never even after centuries made it).

Even emperors of Non Roman origin were plenty like Elagabalus,Septumis,Phillip,etc and I think there might have even been Gaulish Emperors

But these emperors were not Barbarians : they were roman citizens with sometimes exotic origins ,and while these origins were often taken against them in the case of Syrian/Arab emperors (as for what matter so-called Gaulish emperors, they were Roman trough and trough) it wasn't considered as Barbarians and more as "inner foreigners" that could either act as Romans (Severian dynasty) or act (or, rather, being accused of acting) as eastern despots, as Heliogabalus.

What changed at the time of Stillico? Why did it get opposite?

Barbarians, which were before fairly stuck outside Romania as a state, became a more and more common occurence within the empire,with a growing presence into regional and administrative (both civil and military) management. While people as Merobaud or Stilicho weren't really Barbarians in a political sense, they were considered as such (long story short, think how Hispano-Americans are considered as latinos, and consider themselves as such sometimes, even if they're third-generations American citizens) and sometimes seen as a foreign element.
We're more looking at a different gradation due to different political/cultural situation, rather than areal change of consideration.