AHC: Hyper-Soissons

Honestly, if you have a successful/surviving Soissons as the 'WRE' in practice, I'm not sure the ERE will allow them to have Italy, as in, they'd move in first if they could. Soissons would probably do better to secure Gaul, establish someone as a British Client, and then move on Spain, and create buffer states in Germania. Trading with the ERE is grand, and having the Goths in Italy has its benefits - the ERE won't be able to try and unite the Empire (which is a war the ERE is more likely to win than Soissons), until the Goths are dealt with, and if the Goths even slightly acknowledge Soissons as an overlord, it gives them Italy on paper and an ally on that border.

I think that the ERE might still take North Africa, because it did IOTL even with the Goths, but I harbour no belief that Soissons will be anything but a subservient state by the perspective of the ERE. They might call them Ruler of Gaul, Spain, etc - but not the equal of the ERE.

Assuming that this DOESN'T butterfly away the Caliphate (forgive me, but I don't see how Soissons would other than butterflies change everything), then you could see them offer to assist in exchange for recognition as equals, together I think they'd be more than able to reclaim any Caliphate-style war losses

Besides that, it lives to push east through Germania, unless it decides that fighting the ERE is a worthwhile endeavour.

Long run? With the ERE and Soissons working together, I could see Soissons/WRE eventually centring itself around OTL Netherlands, leaving North Africa to the ERE - and competing with the ERE economically by going west so as to circumvent Eastern traders.

As to how, my first instinct is to set up in Paris - it is a better position. In addition, I'd try to bring in Saxons to settle the region and fight as soldiers - whilst reorganising Gallo-Romans around Paris, even if it means uprooting those in the now-Saxon territories. Choose an ally in Britain, someone to be a consistent trade partner, and stick with them. Take any children under a certain age from those defeated, and raise them as Romans - and leave their parents in the fields. Soissons literally has only got the options of inviting in more people to defend them, and/or making the Other into Romans.

Not my strong suit this bit of Roman history, but my understanding has been that the Romans there were strapped for cash, for manpower, for basically everything. Go where the money is, bring the people, and get them under control.
 
I think alot of people are forgetting here that the so-called "Kingdom of Soissons" may have actually never existed as a unified kingdom in the first place. We only know for sure that Syagrius controlled the region around the modern city of Soissons, but the rest of former Roman Gaul is hard to be certain of. Some more recent theories suggest that Syagrius was merely one of many warlords in the fragmented/disunited region formerly known as Roman Gaul and that there wasn't any true centralized control.
 
I think alot of people are forgetting here that the so-called "Kingdom of Soissons" may have actually never existed as a unified kingdom in the first place. We only know for sure that Syagrius controlled the region around the modern city of Soissons, but the rest of former Roman Gaul is hard to be certain of. Some more recent theories suggest that Syagrius was merely one of many warlords in the fragmented/disunited region formerly known as Roman Gaul and that there wasn't any true centralized control.

Maybe that needs to be our PoD - The Warlords forming a new Senate perhaps? Do that and head it up in Paris as the first PoD. Stops Roman infighting, and if it works as the old system with Senators, Consuls and a Dictator - it might work as the best compromise to get things going. Perhaps have Syagrius make the offer, but then gets sidelined by more effective political and military operators (who may have had fewer resources). It only requires 3-4 at first, but if they can get set up that way - and can form a meaningful military force, then they can start considering whether or not to include smaller tribes, some stray Goths, some Franks, etc into the mix.

Now this is less Roman Senate, and more a Gallo-Roman/Semi-Germanic Stratocratic Senate - but it could be a meaningful response to the times. Get the Germanic tribes involved via a Senate, and then have them need to run to get re-elected like anyone else, meanwhile, their troops get folded into the army in the same way the Latins and Italics were in Early Rome. Stipulations on Senators could be something like "Served in the Gallic, or now-folded Germanic army for at least X years". That way anyone who wants to be eligible after the first round is at least a military man, and has gone through the mess of learning the lingua franca, and then the politics.
 
This POD probably doesn't change anything at all.

A fairly strong Frankish state emerged in northern Gaul that, unlike the other successor states to the Western Roman Empire, accepted the decisions of Chalcedon from the start. It expanded and mostly, for mainly geographical reasons, cooperated with the Eastern Roman Empire. The original dynasty was replaced by a new dynasty in the 8th century, that adopted the imperial title.

If Syagrius defeats Clovis, the result is a fairly powerful state in northeastern Gaul that has incorporated the Franks, and which performs exactly like the IOTL Frankish state. Eventually the original dynasty is replaced, probably by the Carolingians.

Its much better for Syagrius and worse for Clovis personally, but no other effects. Well you don't have any Kings of France named "Louis" and the country is called something else, so there is that.
 
This POD probably doesn't change anything at all.

A fairly strong Frankish state emerged in northern Gaul that, unlike the other successor states to the Western Roman Empire, accepted the decisions of Chalcedon from the start. It expanded and mostly, for mainly geographical reasons, cooperated with the Eastern Roman Empire. The original dynasty was replaced by a new dynasty in the 8th century, that adopted the imperial title.

If Syagrius defeats Clovis, the result is a fairly powerful state in northeastern Gaul that has incorporated the Franks, and which performs exactly like the IOTL Frankish state. Eventually the original dynasty is replaced, probably by the Carolingians.

Its much better for Syagrius and worse for Clovis personally, but no other effects. Well you don't have any Kings of France named "Louis" and the country is called something else, so there is that.
While I agree this "Kingdom of Jaille" is the most likely scenario how can we make it less so?
 
This POD probably doesn't change anything at all.

A fairly strong Frankish state emerged in northern Gaul that, unlike the other successor states to the Western Roman Empire, accepted the decisions of Chalcedon from the start. It expanded and mostly, for mainly geographical reasons, cooperated with the Eastern Roman Empire. The original dynasty was replaced by a new dynasty in the 8th century, that adopted the imperial title.

If Syagrius defeats Clovis, the result is a fairly powerful state in northeastern Gaul that has incorporated the Franks, and which performs exactly like the IOTL Frankish state. Eventually the original dynasty is replaced, probably by the Carolingians.

Its much better for Syagrius and worse for Clovis personally, but no other effects. Well you don't have any Kings of France named "Louis" and the country is called something else, so there is that.

Which PoD? Mine?

I would disagree that it wouldn't change anything - simply because unlike the Frankish realm which would divide, fall into feudal infighting, etc - in theory this should avoid some of those civil wars, and having to be elected would mean that it would have to provide the people with something.

Radically different character, with similar geopolitical concerns.
 
If the Franks are incorporated into Soissons/Jaille, then Frank wouldn't be used as a synonym by Orthodox Christians, Muslims and later far eastern peoples to refer to western Europeans once contact is made. Some other term would be used: probably something based off Latin or Roman.
 
@Galba Otho Vitelius
Disagree. Although i see your point about Frankish and sub-Roman political structures being similar at the time, there are huge social differences in the cards. Romans were treated as second-class people in the Frankish states, if that changes, you have a different state because you can't simply revert the hierarchy, you'd need equal (or different but not inferior) status for both parts of the population. Starting into the Middle Ages without this exclusion must have consequences.
 
If the Franks are incorporated into Soissons/Jaille, then Frank wouldn't be used as a synonym by Orthodox Christians, Muslims and later far eastern peoples to refer to western Europeans once contact is made. Some other term would be used: probably something based off Latin or Roman.

If it becomes "Roman", that would, at least in my opinion, bring the Roman Empire to a cultural position not unlike that of China - where it might fall apart, but reunify time and time again. As long as you're Roman - you can grab the Throne of Caesars - rather than the Chinese Mandate of Heaven.

I know I've already said I don't think they'd accept Eastern overlordship if it was demanded, but do you think there are any circumstances that Soissons would ask for it? Something along the lines of "Help us with an army in S.France/Spain and we'll submit to your authority"?
 
I know I've already said I don't think they'd accept Eastern overlordship if it was demanded, but do you think there are any circumstances that Soissons would ask for it? Something along the lines of "Help us with an army in S.France/Spain and we'll submit to your authority"?
Didn't Aegidius already acknowledge Eastern suzerainity when he rebelled against Ricimer? I believe his course of action was something along the lines of:
"I am not going to follow that madman Ricimer, instead I'll only follow you [Emperor Leo]".
 
If it becomes "Roman", that would, at least in my opinion, bring the Roman Empire to a cultural position not unlike that of China - where it might fall apart, but reunify time and time again. As long as you're Roman - you can grab the Throne of Caesars - rather than the Chinese Mandate of Heaven.

I know I've already said I don't think they'd accept Eastern overlordship if it was demanded, but do you think there are any circumstances that Soissons would ask for it? Something along the lines of "Help us with an army in S.France/Spain and we'll submit to your authority"?

I think it'll be a mutual understanding much akin to the arrangement between the Germanic kingdoms and the Eastern Emperor. Whoever rules in Soissons would be acting "on behalf of the one, true Emperor" in Constantinople, given numerous minor titles but otherwise Soissons is acting on its own accord unless their interests are aligned.
 
Didn't Aegidius already acknowledge Eastern suzerainity when he rebelled against Ricimer? I believe his course of action was something along the lines of:
"I am not going to follow that madman Ricimer, instead I'll only follow you [Emperor Leo]".

Yeah, but he'd need to have had some level of success in actually establishing a somewhat meaningful Soissons. He might be the basis of a better PoD to be honest - continuing the Aetius strategy of using the Huns, rather than relying on the Franks may prevent the Franks from being in the position to invade. If he can rely on Romans and Huns, and start ensuring he has a meaningful tax base, and not die (seemingly randomly), that could be the making of Soissons, rather than abruptly dying and leaving his army to his son.
 
If it becomes "Roman", that would, at least in my opinion, bring the Roman Empire to a cultural position not unlike that of China - where it might fall apart, but reunify time and time again. As long as you're Roman - you can grab the Throne of Caesars - rather than the Chinese Mandate of Heaven.

They're Gauls.
 
Yeah, but he'd need to have had some level of success in actually establishing a somewhat meaningful Soissons. He might be the basis of a better PoD to be honest - continuing the Aetius strategy of using the Huns, rather than relying on the Franks may prevent the Franks from being in the position to invade. If he can rely on Romans and Huns, and start ensuring he has a meaningful tax base, and not die (seemingly randomly), that could be the making of Soissons, rather than abruptly dying and leaving his army to his son.

This sounds a little problematic, no? When did successfully rely on foreign troops ver end well?
 
They're Gauls.

They're also Romans. Or Gallo-Romans. I mean, the Byzantines are Greek, but they still should be called (and called themselves) Romans. I think it might work in the same way you are Scottish and British, or English and British - instead it being Gallic and Roman, or Hellenic and Roman.

This sounds a little problematic, no? When did successfully rely on foreign troops ver end well?

Well, he relied of Frank troops - this is a step better because the Huns aren't based just to the north - perhaps I'm naive, but the Huns aren't all that threatening. Don't get me wrong, I see them as a stand-in whilst the Romans can't field purely Gallo-Roman troops, but it is better to have less threatening mercs on your side, instead of the more threatening Franks.
 
If Clovis meets an accident and the Gallo-Roman statelet survives into the Sixth Century, it may get reinforcements from Britain as the Saxon invasion causes more Britons to emigrate. So you get a sort of "Brittany on steroids".
 
If Clovis meets an accident and the Gallo-Roman statelet survives into the Sixth Century, it may get reinforcements from Britain as the Saxon invasion causes more Britons to emigrate. So you get a sort of "Brittany on steroids".
Hmm if more than OTL then we could see an earlier Wessex and possibly prevent Mercian supremacy. Thus we're more likely to see a southern Saxony versus a northern Anglia rather than mingling that Mercia lead to all being Anglecynn.
 
This POD probably doesn't change anything at all.

A fairly strong Frankish state emerged in northern Gaul that, unlike the other successor states to the Western Roman Empire, accepted the decisions of Chalcedon from the start. It expanded and mostly, for mainly geographical reasons, cooperated with the Eastern Roman Empire. The original dynasty was replaced by a new dynasty in the 8th century, that adopted the imperial title.

If Syagrius defeats Clovis, the result is a fairly powerful state in northeastern Gaul that has incorporated the Franks, and which performs exactly like the IOTL Frankish state. Eventually the original dynasty is replaced, probably by the Carolingians.

Its much better for Syagrius and worse for Clovis personally, but no other effects. Well you don't have any Kings of France named "Louis" and the country is called something else, so there is that.
The Franks Salic Law code mandates that a father must split up his estates equally among all his sons. Which is what Charlemagne after his death. Salic Law propably doesn't influence European legal systems either now that I think about it.
 
This POD probably doesn't change anything at all.

A fairly strong Frankish state emerged in northern Gaul that, unlike the other successor states to the Western Roman Empire, accepted the decisions of Chalcedon from the start. It expanded and mostly, for mainly geographical reasons, cooperated with the Eastern Roman Empire. The original dynasty was replaced by a new dynasty in the 8th century, that adopted the imperial title.

If Syagrius defeats Clovis, the result is a fairly powerful state in northeastern Gaul that has incorporated the Franks, and which performs exactly like the IOTL Frankish state. Eventually the original dynasty is replaced, probably by the Carolingians.

Its much better for Syagrius and worse for Clovis personally, but no other effects. Well you don't have any Kings of France named "Louis" and the country is called something else, so there is that.

So you are saying that the Franks would inevitably come to dominate the Gallo-Romans?
 
Top