With a POD of 461, have the Gallo-Romans overcome the Barbarians and, if possible, have them conquer their way to the Côte d'Azur before 550. Replacing Aegidius/Syagrius with a slightly more capable commander is acceptable, but not encouraged.
Results:A France not called France with no Germanic influences, no Louis names for French kings, maybe less influence for Paris.
We'll always have Lutetia.
So would a roman successor state in the west be able to link up with the Byzantines given the best next 200 years say-700 AD?
They might view them as equals, or Lords or rivals depending on their position if they have reconquered Gaul, North Italy, and presumably Northern Iberia with a stable Rhine border they would most definitely see the east as rivals.
Even if one leader manages to struggle on top of the heap in Northern Gaul, that doesn`t mean he`s not going to get overthrown, or his successor is a total failure, etc. Continuous success isn`t what the political entities of that time were up to.Surely they would at least want to move in the direction of Italy? Would also prevent the Lombards from getting any ideas, same with a border on the Pyrenees.
There`s very little evidence of any sort, if I´m not much mistaken, but it was my impression, too, that Syagrius wasn`t exactly Julius Caesar.Isn't there some evidence that Syagrius was actually pretty weak, and we exaggerate his import?