I imagine if the ottomans almost completely conquered all of Italy that coalition would be wayyyy bigger
An Age of Miracles Continues: The Empire of Rhomania
- Thread starter Basileus444
- Start date
Cryostorm
Monthly Donor
For that matter half the European wars of the 17th-19th century can be described as France, and maybe an ally or two, vs Coalition of (Insert various nations that border France or border states bordering France).
Personally, I really like what Basilieus is doing with the Romans and the last update was one of my favorite, as it shows how the main character needs to be taken down a peg from time to time, and I particularly appreciate the way he is depicting Rhomania's rivals as not only having an axe to grind, but are also competent. Having strong rivals makes for a far more compelling story, as is reading about Rhomania's triumphs and fuck ups in equal measure. I'll also be looking forward to seeing how the Triunes handle their own period of adversity, and see how it tries to handle its internal situation with varying degrees of success and failure.
Cryostorm
Monthly Donor
Exactly, Rhome's triumph in the War of Rhoman Succession would not have been nearly as great if it had been a curb stomp at Belgrade and Edessa.
Basileus I agree with pretty much everything you just said.
In OTL there were no less than 6 Holy League coalitions formed against the Ottoman Empire in OTL between 1535 and 1717 in an effort to stop their expansion into Europe. Those Holy Leagues were definitely diverse, broad encompassing alliances of states from all across Europe, with the 1684 one being especially prolific featuring Austria, Spain, Poland-Lithuania, Russia, Venice, and numerous states in the Holy Roman Empire including several Protestant states like Saxony. Similarly, the 7/8(?) Italian Wars were fought to prevent any power, be it the Hapsburgs or the French from assuming suzerainty over the Italian peninsula.
The point I'm trying to make is that Europe has a long history of coming together to oppose any one power that grows too strong in OTL and I don't see why they wouldn't do so in TTL either, especially when the Romans have been much more successful than the Ottomans in projecting power into Europe. In this timeline, they have long since taken Sicily and Venice which gives Constantinople incredible influence over the rest of Italy as we've seen in this recent War of Rhomaion Succession. Now they've sacked Rome (again), they've killed the Pope in Rome (again), they're currently occupying Genoa and large parts of Tuscany, they've ransacked most of Southern Germany, they've essentially vassalized Hungary (which includes Austria ITTL), and they've effectively made the Adriactic Sea a Roman lake.
Now add to this the editorials that they are allegedly eying up Northern Italy, either making them Roman vassals or annexing them completely, an act which would put the Romans right on the border with the Bernese League, Arles, and the Holy Roman Empire and you have a recipe for disaster. Even before the release of these editorials, the Romans were in a precarious situation diplomatically as their newfound superiority complex and cruelty has made it all but impossible to deal with the Latin states of Europe on even a remotely cordial level. Now I'm not saying that they brought this war upon themselves, but their inaction and hubris certainly didn't do them any favors here.
My only issue is with the ineptitude, or rather negligence of the Roman Government for allowing something like this to happen, when they had every opportunity to avert it entirely or minimize it to a more manageable degree. D3 is by all accounts is a tenacious and respectable Emperor, who has had little trouble exerting his authority when necessary as seen in his handling of the recent Banknotes crisis, which makes his absence in this matter particularly puzzling. I'm guessing his rapidly declining health is a major reason for this, as I can't see why he would have let things progress as far as they have - that or somebody isn't telling him everything he needs to know to make the decisions necessary to avert this war. Otherwise, I can't see why he would willingly allow the situation to become this bad.
In OTL there were no less than 6 Holy League coalitions formed against the Ottoman Empire in OTL between 1535 and 1717 in an effort to stop their expansion into Europe. Those Holy Leagues were definitely diverse, broad encompassing alliances of states from all across Europe, with the 1684 one being especially prolific featuring Austria, Spain, Poland-Lithuania, Russia, Venice, and numerous states in the Holy Roman Empire including several Protestant states like Saxony. Similarly, the 7/8(?) Italian Wars were fought to prevent any power, be it the Hapsburgs or the French from assuming suzerainty over the Italian peninsula.
The point I'm trying to make is that Europe has a long history of coming together to oppose any one power that grows too strong in OTL and I don't see why they wouldn't do so in TTL either, especially when the Romans have been much more successful than the Ottomans in projecting power into Europe. In this timeline, they have long since taken Sicily and Venice which gives Constantinople incredible influence over the rest of Italy as we've seen in this recent War of Rhomaion Succession. Now they've sacked Rome (again), they've killed the Pope in Rome (again), they're currently occupying Genoa and large parts of Tuscany, they've ransacked most of Southern Germany, they've essentially vassalized Hungary (which includes Austria ITTL), and they've effectively made the Adriactic Sea a Roman lake.
Now add to this the editorials that they are allegedly eying up Northern Italy, either making them Roman vassals or annexing them completely, an act which would put the Romans right on the border with the Bernese League, Arles, and the Holy Roman Empire and you have a recipe for disaster. Even before the release of these editorials, the Romans were in a precarious situation diplomatically as their newfound superiority complex and cruelty has made it all but impossible to deal with the Latin states of Europe on even a remotely cordial level. Now I'm not saying that they brought this war upon themselves, but their inaction and hubris certainly didn't do them any favors here.
My only issue is with the ineptitude, or rather negligence of the Roman Government for allowing something like this to happen, when they had every opportunity to avert it entirely or minimize it to a more manageable degree. D3 is by all accounts is a tenacious and respectable Emperor, who has had little trouble exerting his authority when necessary as seen in his handling of the recent Banknotes crisis, which makes his absence in this matter particularly puzzling. I'm guessing his rapidly declining health is a major reason for this, as I can't see why he would have let things progress as far as they have - that or somebody isn't telling him everything he needs to know to make the decisions necessary to avert this war. Otherwise, I can't see why he would willingly allow the situation to become this bad.
Regardless of anything else that takes place re: the update/rewrite I can easily see the Romans just throwing their hands up and essentially withdrawing from Central/Western European affairs for decades after these events and focusing almost exclusively on the Ottomans and South/Island Asia.
I'm fairly certain B444 has mentioned this before so I'm not exactly going out on a limb (at least I think it has been mentioned before) but I can easily see that happening now that a combination of Roman arrogance and stupidity combined with typical Triune hyper-competence has made Latin Europe hostile for generations. Let the Latins have Europe - the rest of the world is plenty big enough.
I'm fairly certain B444 has mentioned this before so I'm not exactly going out on a limb (at least I think it has been mentioned before) but I can easily see that happening now that a combination of Roman arrogance and stupidity combined with typical Triune hyper-competence has made Latin Europe hostile for generations. Let the Latins have Europe - the rest of the world is plenty big enough.
To be clear, I don't think that Europe dogpiling on Rhomania is unrealistic or something; that's perfectly possible, and has happened many times before in OTL Europe with other states.
What my issue is, is that this whole thing seems contrived. For some hard-to-describe little reasons all put together, it doesn't feel natural.
There's this whole thing about the Romans being too distracted to have a coherent policy on Italy. While I can quite accept that a plan on Italy isn't there and that most diplomats are more busy with other major issues, surely someone would have noticed the Arletians, Sicilians and who knows who else knocking on Rhomania's doors, asking what will happen with Italy. I can't believe the Roman diplomatic system is so tied up that it can't bother about a place that is apparently talked about a lot in bloodthirsty newspaper editorials.
Then there are the Arletians, who are justifiably suspicious in the extreme but apparently took... the war-way out. Against an empire even more powerful than the OTL Ottomans. With Arles' own greatest geopolitical threat weighing in to cut down Arles' most powerful potential ally.
Why does Arles apparently have no problem with this?
Granted, this can be a rational choice the Arletians make, but not in this situation, not yet. I honestly do not think the Romans have been provoking enough for that.
In contrast, an semi-informal Arletian-Sicilian alliance against Roman involvement in Italy makes much more sense, especially if they manage to get the Spaniards on board for this occasion. No war, but a clear diplomatic statement that they will negotiate on Italy, together, now.
Also, the other Latin powers should be extremely wary of the Triunes, who should be about as powerful as the Romans at this point, and more of a threat to the other Latin powers since, well, Triunia is right there, and they were trying to stop Triune expansion before the Romans smashed in, weren't they? I don't think they think that the Roman wolf is so much a threat that they will let in the Triune fox, not yet at least.
You may disagree with my position, and yes, there are good arguments against my position, but this is my honest opinion.
What my issue is, is that this whole thing seems contrived. For some hard-to-describe little reasons all put together, it doesn't feel natural.
There's this whole thing about the Romans being too distracted to have a coherent policy on Italy. While I can quite accept that a plan on Italy isn't there and that most diplomats are more busy with other major issues, surely someone would have noticed the Arletians, Sicilians and who knows who else knocking on Rhomania's doors, asking what will happen with Italy. I can't believe the Roman diplomatic system is so tied up that it can't bother about a place that is apparently talked about a lot in bloodthirsty newspaper editorials.
Then there are the Arletians, who are justifiably suspicious in the extreme but apparently took... the war-way out. Against an empire even more powerful than the OTL Ottomans. With Arles' own greatest geopolitical threat weighing in to cut down Arles' most powerful potential ally.
Why does Arles apparently have no problem with this?
Granted, this can be a rational choice the Arletians make, but not in this situation, not yet. I honestly do not think the Romans have been provoking enough for that.
In contrast, an semi-informal Arletian-Sicilian alliance against Roman involvement in Italy makes much more sense, especially if they manage to get the Spaniards on board for this occasion. No war, but a clear diplomatic statement that they will negotiate on Italy, together, now.
Also, the other Latin powers should be extremely wary of the Triunes, who should be about as powerful as the Romans at this point, and more of a threat to the other Latin powers since, well, Triunia is right there, and they were trying to stop Triune expansion before the Romans smashed in, weren't they? I don't think they think that the Roman wolf is so much a threat that they will let in the Triune fox, not yet at least.
You may disagree with my position, and yes, there are good arguments against my position, but this is my honest opinion.
I didn't have any problems with the coalition forming against Rhomania in Northern Italy, mainly because the threat of the Romans was always real in the eyes of the Latins due to the atrocities they committed against the Pope and the Genoese. I was more or less disturbed at D3's inactivity throughout the entire crisis. Even if his health declined through the previous posts, I doubt that his anti-Latin sentiments or his poor health would have prevented him from making some pragmatic decisions during this crisis that could've staved off all out war. Also, isn't Europe generally war exhausted as well, not just Rhomania? It doesn't seem right that people are willing to commit even more bloodshed so soon after some pretty major conflicts like the Great Latin War.
Like I said before, I still generally believe in the use of a diplomatic crisis or a show of force by Spain, Arles, and the UK to force Rhomania to remove Lombardy and Northern Italy from their sphere of influence and to set hard boundaries that the Romans cannot cross. It's a loss for Rhomania and a victory for the Latins, but probably an outcome that prevents Sicilian/Roman relations from being trashed and sets the stage for a more destructive future Latin-Roman war that'll eventually erupt due to Roman arrogance. If D3 was also behind in defusing the situation then it'd be a great victory for him but also one quickly forgotten in-universe, especially by the Romans, adding to the legacy of the Forgotten Emperor. Regardless, it is B444's story and I'm interesting to see what will happen next.
Overall, this is a sequence of events that I can definitely take to heart and remember, even as a newcomer and layman of this timeline. There's timelines that I'm more invested in, but at the end of the day, it's ultimately an author's own work and I should cool down and relax whenever I get too emotionally invested and try to lash out in harsh criticism. As B444 said, passion and emotional investment aren't excuses to be a jerk.
Like I said before, I still generally believe in the use of a diplomatic crisis or a show of force by Spain, Arles, and the UK to force Rhomania to remove Lombardy and Northern Italy from their sphere of influence and to set hard boundaries that the Romans cannot cross. It's a loss for Rhomania and a victory for the Latins, but probably an outcome that prevents Sicilian/Roman relations from being trashed and sets the stage for a more destructive future Latin-Roman war that'll eventually erupt due to Roman arrogance. If D3 was also behind in defusing the situation then it'd be a great victory for him but also one quickly forgotten in-universe, especially by the Romans, adding to the legacy of the Forgotten Emperor. Regardless, it is B444's story and I'm interesting to see what will happen next.
Overall, this is a sequence of events that I can definitely take to heart and remember, even as a newcomer and layman of this timeline. There's timelines that I'm more invested in, but at the end of the day, it's ultimately an author's own work and I should cool down and relax whenever I get too emotionally invested and try to lash out in harsh criticism. As B444 said, passion and emotional investment aren't excuses to be a jerk.
Aren't they basically doing that now? Otherwise, they'd be far more active in Northern Italian affairs than what's happening currently. This crisis probably would be the nail in the coffin for any Roman involvement with Western Europe since the Ottomans are a far bigger threat while the Spanish are licking their wounds in Asia.
From what i remember the bloody note is from a Roman official talking about jingoistic musings about the Romans expanding further into Italy. Mozorov is a Pronsk emissary to Rome who was enraged after finding out about the letter. I'm pretty sure that's the basics of it at least, I may be mis-remembering though as I had something to drink to celebrate the new update being posted
Cryostorm
Monthly Donor
Close, the "Bloody Note" was an extremely over the top reaction to Spain's attack in Island Asia that promoted shredding the agreement to not bring colonial fights to Europe and attack Spain directly, preferably with as much destruction and looting, not to mention the rape and death that would be included, of Iberia as possible. Purportedly written by one of the warhawks, and based largely on comments here in the thread, and published in the news broadsheets.
Anger is probably an understatement when it comes to Latin-Roman relations, that's for sure.
----
As a side note, the Triunes becoming the focus of the timeline would actually be kinda interesting. They're probably the strongest continental state in Europe and seeing the Latin perspective in as much detail as the Romans is entirely new to us. Most of what we see of Spain, Arles, the HRE, or the UK is always from Rhomania, which has a well-deserved, but extremely disturbing near-genocidal hatred towards every Latin. Of course, the Triunes tend to be portrayed as jerks all the way through, but that doesn't mean there isn't some good people living there or leaders who are generally kind and generous to their own people. Humanizing the Triunes would go a long way of making the world a lot more vibrant and more human. We'd probably see less people clamoring for Rome to beat down evil Latin NPCs like it's a game, that's for sure.
Last edited:
Honestly this is the main reason why I mostly only lurk and read the timeline despite reading for so many years. The comments here frequently go beyond even jingoism, there's pretty regular discussion and recommendation of population displacement, ethnic cleansing, and massacres; often with a quite blase or even eager tone.
I'd like to think most people are just ignorant of how they're coming across and going too far with Rome fanboying, but with the state of the internet these days and the fact it's more often about Muslim subjects of Rome and their neighbouring Muslim populations, it's quite uncomfortable.
I appreciate that you're willing to call it out as an author.
Last edited:
How about the Germans and Lothariginians too? I would like to know more about the upheaval on those countries and how they will deal with the fallout of a lost war. There's not much pov on central europe, there's also Russia to be considered since their set-up to be a democratic state (completely opposite of their OTL). Would be great to see it, since I want to see how it would affect the world wholesale. (Isn't the raven king also coming? How would the TTL revolution against absolutism pan out?)
I think that's probably the most important thing that has come out of this drama, and like, I'll hold my hands up and apologise because I definitely see myself as one of the jerk-ier responses. Sorry again, this is a great piece of work, and I'll certainly be using this as a reference to improve my behaviour from now on.
I do want to emphasise before anything I say here that obviously its your story, you write it as you want, and please do because it's what has made it so good.
I get the rationale, it's hardly been subtle that some comments have been used in this way, and I think you're right to have pushed back against it (personally if it was being made as a point in replies I missed it), but I think that the Doylism is possibly the crux of why (at least in my case) it didn't make sense when reading in the moment. In retrospect whilst writing this there is certainly some context scattered through updates, the prime example being this titbit in the previous update.
The Warhawks are explicitly here are a cause for the foreign policy, and weirdly I think its easy to miss in the previous update to remember it for this one, which is a shame because really it is the crux for most of the current update, but whilst it explains relative paralysis - it doesn't quite explain why they are unable to say "There is no current policy regarding N.Italy". Even if it was just "it is an embarrassment for the Foreign Office to admit that is has no policy, and that the Emperor has no policy, so in an act of trying to save face, it issues an internal memo to not communicate about Italy" or "With the internal infighting over N.Italy, and the devastation of the civil service in the wake of the punishments of the Central Bank, and a reduction in manpower due to austerity measures, the paralysis over what to do has become paralysis on even acting". Something that explains the institutional paralysis rather than stating it.
I will 100% however admit that without the last update to refer to, I can't remember if that was done, perhaps it was implicit in that resources were being spent on utter nonsense like the Bloody Note, or stated, but I may have missed it in which case its rather moot because I think the Doylist motivation and the behaviour it was address is more important in why this has happened (even if the above might have smoothed the landing).
But back to the point I was trying to make - I get the Doylist motivation, but it does seem out of character for the characters when previously you've made the Romans behave very much not like how some of us have argued, and then in style, from my perspective, being willing to narratively deny those of us who do miss a bit of "Kataphractoi, Ready Kontos" because we don't deserve anything from the story. Considering that I think the last clear, unambiguous victory that I recall clearly was Nikitas vs Hungary, I think it speaks to the quality of the story being told that people are sticking around even if they're clamouring for that fix and vocally calling for it. Doesn't mean you give the kiddies the lollypop they're asking for, BUT on the other hand it does feel a little uncalled for to have the story punish that clamouring, when commentary to that effect would do. If there was a reply post that made clear your thoughts about the jingoism, I'm sorry for missing it or forgetting it/them/the subtext of responses, I am - but it does seem that essentially that attempt to address the jingoism essentially crashed into that tension, and combined with fact some of us want some unambiguous victory (like seemingly promised with Ody) combined again with the fact that things aren't even neutral for the Romans at the moment with economic crisis after hard-won defensive wars back to back, in the spirit of honesty, seems like the point is being over-egged - at least for me. After the Spanish attack in the east and the economic crises I know all I wanted was some chill peace to wind down the tumultuous reign of D3. But certainly from all of *waves hands at the thread generally* I think the point to reign it in a little has been made very clear and will be taken on board (at least for me).
It is weird to think how the medium of it being a forum-story rather than just a novel that you can ignore the twitter-rage for is probably deeply involved in this, but that's another discussion and I'm aware how self-important this post probably makes me come across.
TL;DR - I'm sorry my dude, I feel I was immature, it was right to call me out (I know it wasn't by name, but I'll put myself in that group), but I also don't think the explanation of events had a strong enough base in the update itself for the sheer overwhelming cascade of events that it involved, to make the Doylist writing seem more than a kick in the teeth, but point made.
No, it does not have to be a terrible mistake. It is quite possible to make the point somewhere in the storyline that war begets ruin for all and woe to he who takes the sword first, and a good point that is, but the way Basileus seems to have gone about it in the last updates seems ham-fisted, twisting the plot to fit the anti-jingoistic agenda.
While that is relatively easier to do in any other genre of fiction, it is damn well difficult to pull that off convincingly in alternate history in this forum especially, because the plot is not entirely under your control. The plot almost evolves on its own, for this is history, and we don't have, for example, random storms to make the point that climate change is not good, because we won't believe that without strong, credible allohistorical explanations.
I, for my part, am interested primarily in the way the big picture unfolds, so anything that makes that big picture seem uncredible is problematic for me.
About whatever drama seems to have occurred in the four pages that I'm still conveniently ignoring:
Come on. This guy is using his free time to make what amounts to a labour of love. We may give our criticisms, but we should remain respectful, because while you and I may have some emotional attachment in this story, Basileus has poured his heart and soul in it. It will do us all good to keep that in mind.
On a completely different note:
Wikipedia says that the Matsumae clan held a monopoly on trade with the islands north of Honshu for a really long time, and that Japanese colonization of Hokkaido was ongoing, though only in small amounts, as most of the Japanese immigrants to the trading outposts on Ezo went there to escape the constant warfare of the Sengoku era.
In OTL, Ezo was theoretically in the Japanese sphere of influence, but would be mostly ignored till the Tokugawa shogunate assumed direct control in the early 19th century in response to Russia edging in from the north.
Would Japan, now without sakoku, start colonizing Hokkaido and Karafuto (Sakhalin) earlier?
Wikipedia says that the Matsumae clan held a monopoly on trade with the islands north of Honshu for a really long time, and that Japanese colonization of Hokkaido was ongoing, though only in small amounts, as most of the Japanese immigrants to the trading outposts on Ezo went there to escape the constant warfare of the Sengoku era.
In OTL, Ezo was theoretically in the Japanese sphere of influence, but would be mostly ignored till the Tokugawa shogunate assumed direct control in the early 19th century in response to Russia edging in from the north.
Would Japan, now without sakoku, start colonizing Hokkaido and Karafuto (Sakhalin) earlier?