A surviving, but feudal Western Roman Empire

In its final decades, the Western Roman Empire was in crisis in numerous ways. The cities were in decadence, aninthe commerce with it, meanwhile the rural population was increasing and the lack of slaves combined with the barbarian invasions, made this people work for the protection of their lords. Also, the so called barbarian tribes were not only the pricipal invaders, but the main source of protection of the WRE as the roman military was declining, and became very influential in the roman politics.
In resume, the bases osf feudalism were here.
So, i was thinking about a possibility : if, instead of being politically replaced by the barbarian kingdoms, the WRE had continued its existence, but leaving all the barnarians to settle in the regiona of the empire, offering lands and total autonomy in exchange for nominal subordination, being their territories still considered part of the Roman Empire? So we would have the WRE becoming a more roman and non electoral version of the Holy Roman Empire: a fractured "state", with little central authority, but "surviving" in the middle ages with its old borders almost intact in paper.

Could this happen?

Consequences ?

How long could this last?
 
In its final decades, the Western Roman Empire was in crisis in numerous ways. The cities were in decadence, aninthe commerce with it, meanwhile the rural population was increasing and the lack of slaves combined with the barbarian invasions, made this people work for the protection of their lords. Also, the so called barbarian tribes were not only the pricipal invaders, but the main source of protection of the WRE as the roman military was declining, and became very influential in the roman politics.
In resume, the bases osf feudalism were here.
So, i was thinking about a possibility : if, instead of being politically replaced by the barbarian kingdoms, the WRE had continued its existence, but leaving all the barnarians to settle in the regiona of the empire, offering lands and total autonomy in exchange for nominal subordination, being their territories still considered part of the Roman Empire? So we would have the WRE becoming a more roman and non electoral version of the Holy Roman Empire: a fractured "state", with little central authority, but "surviving" in the middle ages with its old borders almost intact in paper.

Could this happen?

Consequences ?

How long could this last?


In some ways this did happen. While there was no Emperor The Old Roman families on the whole stayed in power, the simply moved to the ecclesiastical roles. What we find in the Merovingian period was an overwhelming number of bishops of Gallo-Roman origin, who were of Noble Roman descent. Many of them eventually intermarried with the Frankish secular nobility. The Franks themselves often indicated the supremacy of the Byzantine Emperor, for example, Clovis was named a Patrician of Rome.
 
In its final decades, the Western Roman Empire was in crisis in numerous ways. The cities were in decadence, aninthe commerce with it, meanwhile the rural population was increasing and the lack of slaves combined with the barbarian invasions, made this people work for the protection of their lords. Also, the so called barbarian tribes were not only the pricipal invaders, but the main source of protection of the WRE as the roman military was declining, and became very influential in the roman politics.
In resume, the bases osf feudalism were here.
So, i was thinking about a possibility : if, instead of being politically replaced by the barbarian kingdoms, the WRE had continued its existence, but leaving all the barnarians to settle in the regiona of the empire, offering lands and total autonomy in exchange for nominal subordination, being their territories still considered part of the Roman Empire? So we would have the WRE becoming a more roman and non electoral version of the Holy Roman Empire: a fractured "state", with little central authority, but "surviving" in the middle ages with its old borders almost intact in paper.

Could this happen?

Consequences ?

How long could this last?

If you want the survival of the WRE as a political entity, you could start by making the Vandal invasion of Africa either never happen, be diverted, or fail. This would keep a rich and relatively safe province in WRE hands, immensely help in maintaining naval supremacy and trade, and remove a mortal threat to Rome. From there, the WRE has a far better chance at survival. Even IOTL, the ERE maintained diplomatic relations and nominal superiority over the barbarian kingdoms, so TTL’s WRE could initiate a tributary relationship with TTL’s barbarian kingdoms.
 
In some ways this did happen. While there was no Emperor The Old Roman families on the whole stayed in power, the simply moved to the ecclesiastical roles. What we find in the Merovingian period was an overwhelming number of bishops of Gallo-Roman origin, who were of Noble Roman descent. Many of them eventually intermarried with the Frankish secular nobility. The Franks themselves often indicated the supremacy of the Byzantine Emperor, for example, Clovis was named a Patrician of Rome.
OTL is kind of close of what i want. The only difference is that in TTL the wester roman empire and emperor would still exists nominally, with the latter having equal (if not, even less) power of a medieval king - that is, almost a symbolic figure in any territory out of the capital.

If you want the survival of the WRE as a political entity, you could start by making the Vandal invasion of Africa either never happen, be diverted, or fail. This would keep a rich and relatively safe province in WRE hands, immensely help in maintaining naval supremacy and trade, and remove a mortal threat to Rome. From there, the WRE has a far better chance at survival. Even IOTL, the ERE maintained diplomatic relations and nominal superiority over the barbarian kingdoms, so TTL’s WRE could initiate a tributary relationship with TTL’s barbarian kingdoms.

Yes, i have this in mind. The only difference would be that the barbarian kingdoms would be considered nominally a part of the roman empire, even if they are de facto almost independent (feudal style state).
 
OTL is kind of close of what i want. The only difference is that in TTL the wester roman empire and emperor would still exists nominally, with the latter having equal (if not, even less) power of a medieval king - that is, almost a symbolic figure in any territory out of the capital.



Yes, i have this in mind. The only difference would be that the barbarian kingdoms would be considered nominally a part of the roman empire, even if they are de facto almost independent (feudal style state).

Depending on how you look at that situation, TTL’s Roman Empire could be considered to be like that. Again, even OTL’s ERE considered the barbarian kingdoms to be a part of the Roman Empire, subservient to the ERE. TTL’s WRE, as it strengthens, could engage in wars to increase its power and prestige to the point where it is regarded as preeminent over the other kingdoms, maybe even having the kingdoms be close to de facto as well as de jure vassals, but be unable to actually conquer them because they’d form a coalition to retain their kingdoms.
 
Depending on how you look at that situation, TTL’s Roman Empire could be considered to be like that. Again, even OTL’s ERE considered the barbarian kingdoms to be a part of the Roman Empire, subservient to the ERE. TTL’s WRE, as it strengthens, could engage in wars to increase its power and prestige to the point where it is regarded as preeminent over the other kingdoms, maybe even having the kingdoms be close to de facto as well as de jure vassals, but be unable to actually conquer them because they’d form a coalition to retain their kingdoms.

I wonder how many butterflies this change would create. For example, even if the western and eastern churchs were de facto very different by the beginning of the middle ages, the great schism as we know wouldn't happen, as both empires are theoretically governed by true roman emperors. The Germany as we know could not exist in TTL, as the expansion of the franks to the east and the creation of East Frankia wouldn't hhappen. Also, the expansion of Islam could bring a new centralization of the empire, both in the "east -west" way and in the feudalized state of the west ("we need to fight with a common enemy"). The butterflies are huge
 
I wonder how many butterflies this change would create. For example, even if the western and eastern churchs were de facto very different by the beginning of the middle ages, the great schism as we know wouldn't happen, as both empires are theoretically governed by true roman emperors. The Germany as we know could not exist in TTL, as the expansion of the franks to the east and the creation of East Frankia wouldn't hhappen. Also, the expansion of Islam could bring a new centralization of the empire, both in the "east -west" way and in the feudalized state of the west ("we need to fight with a common enemy"). The butterflies are huge

It could be even bigger than that. For example, Islam as we know it might be butterflied away.
 
It could be even bigger than that. For example, Islam as we know it might be butterflied away.

I understand the concept of "butterfly effect", but there is no specific correlation between the nominal existence of WRE and the emergence of Islam (unless the Roman Empires conquered or christianised Arabia).
I'm curious about the development of latin in the WRE. Would the romance languages in the "provinces"/kingdoma still be considered dialects of Latin? Also, the linguistic development of peripheral regions, like Britain, would be interesting (specially if the Anglo-Saxons still came, but with the permision of the emperor).
 
I understand the concept of "butterfly effect", but there is no specific correlation between the nominal existence of WRE and the emergence of Islam (unless the Roman Empires conquered or christianised Arabia).
I'm curious about the development of latin in the WRE. Would the romance languages in the "provinces"/kingdoma still be considered dialects of Latin? Also, the linguistic development of peripheral regions, like Britain, would be interesting (specially if the Anglo-Saxons still came, but with the permision of the emperor).

Well, there are small things, like that a surviving WRE with Africa won’t need to try (and fail) to reconsider Africa with ERE help (basilicus, I’m looking at you). The ERE may have more trouble with the Ostrogoths. Justinian may not have the same pretext he had IOTL, if he even rises to prominence. The progression of emperors in the ERE may change as well, butterflying the last Roman-Persian war (which was justified by the usurpation of Phocas), which may in turn butterfly Islam, or leave two stronger, less depleted empires in the place of the two battered, demoralized ones of OTL. Even if such an Islam were to arise, different migrations, actions, marriages, etc. of people would culminate in something different in this alt-Islam, however slightly. This only scratches the surface of things that could have gone differently, and doesn’t even bring chaos theory into the mix.
 
Well, there are small things, like that a surviving WRE with Africa won’t need to try (and fail) to reconsider Africa with ERE help (basilicus, I’m looking at you). The ERE may have more trouble with the Ostrogoths. Justinian may not have the same pretext he had IOTL, if he even rises to prominence. The progression of emperors in the ERE may change as well, butterflying the last Roman-Persian war (which was justified by the usurpation of Phocas), which may in turn butterfly Islam, or leave two stronger, less depleted empires in the place of the two battered, demoralized ones of OTL. Even if such an Islam were to arise, different migrations, actions, marriages, etc. of people would culminate in something different in this alt-Islam, however slightly. This only scratches the surface of things that could have gone differently, and doesn’t even bring chaos theory into the mix.


I understand now. Also, the fact that any Eastern emperor wouldn't have to try his "reconquest" of the WRE territories itself gives the ERE more force to focus on the disputes with the persians.
Also, you mentioned the ostrogoths.Aren't their wars between them and the ERE butterflied away by the premise, as WRE would still have a relatively centralized control in Italy?
 
I understand now. Also, the fact that any Eastern emperor wouldn't have to try his "reconquest" of the WRE territories itself gives the ERE more force to focus on the disputes with the persians.
Also, you mentioned the ostrogoths.Aren't their wars between them and the ERE butterflied away by the premise, as WRE would still have a relatively centralized control in Italy?

I mean that the goths might still cause trouble in the balkans... assuming adrianople has occurred...
 
Top