Attila in Constantinople

In 447 the walls of Constantinople were extremely damaged by an earthquake, causing many towers to collapse and creating gaping holes in many sections of the wall. Attila was on his way and had already finished sieging many roman cities in Moesia and Thrace he had already destroyed every Roman army they threw at him. In OTL the people of the city were able to repair the walls in an unprecedented 60 days.

What if the repairs were not effective, or they simply did not finish in time? Attila now has the chance to enter the city and give it a thorough sacking. I don't think he will be able to even destroy the city, and nor would he want to. Attila was well aware such a great city would be worth much more as a tax base than as pile of rubble.

To make it more interesting, what if Theodosius II dies during the siege or is deposed afterwords. I think the possible rulers of the empire are Chrysaphius the Eunuch who always supported appeasement to Attila. The Empress Pulcheria was an enemy of his, but if Theodosius is dead perhaps she could persuade the Senate to put her in as sole ruler or she could quickly find a husband like OTL, or would Zeno the Isaurian and master of soldiers launch a coup.

I was thinking if there if Zeno does take power it would be very interesting for there to be Pagan emperor at this time. I don't know too much about him, but apparently he planned to murder Theodosius 450 AD.
 
Last edited:
I actually asked myself the same question in the form of what if Attila the Hun became the Eastern Roman Emperor instead of planning to become the Western Roman Emperor.
 
I don't know if Attila really wanted to become emperor, if he wanted to I think he could've. But Attila died in 453 so even if he did become the Emperor it would be a short reign. I think if I make this more of a TL I wouldn't want to add too many more butterflies to it than I have to so I would keep a similar death date.


I'm thinking Attila would stick to his barbarian ways, and inflict a similar series of raids that he did to the East as he did to the West. In stead of invading Gaul and eventually Italy, he would raid into Anatolia and maybe as far as to Alleppo.
 
Last edited:
Here are some more ideas about random parts of the world:

The sacking lasts for a week. The General Flavius Zeno is fighting in the last tower killing over 30 Huns before being brought down. News gets out to the rest of the empire and his memory is immediatly hollowed. The many Libraries and Monastaries are sacked by Attila, similar to the burning of the Libary of Alexandria this was huge blow to human knowledge. Some books and scribes escape across the Bosporus. But in general Attila does huge damage to the city. Emperor Theodosius II is dead it is said he jumped off the walls of the city.

News of the Sack brings Great King Yazdegerd II to the west. He summons his Christian vassals including the Armenians to a council at Ctesiphon and urges them to cut ties with the West and adopt more Nestorian aspects (he himself is Zorastrian but he wants to ensure their loyalty). The Nobles, seeing no support possible from the Byzantines agree to break with the West and the Armenian church brings in more Nestorian principles. Yazdegerd II relieved that the Armenians are now loyal goes on to prepare for an invasion of the Eastern Empire.

Basically it makes sense that the Armenian revolt is avoided. This will mean a much more powerful Sassanid empire, but the question of religion is very interesting. If there is not the bad blood between Yazdegerd II and the Christians I think the question of religion for the Sassanids is going to be punted to his successor.

The Zokomid dynasty of Arabia are stronger in the long run. They fought the Persians twice in support of Theodosius II so they will likely stay allied to whatever ex-Byzantine states exist. They do not relax into military pacification and instead maintain a strong force. They take the time to claim Palestine after the imprisonment of the Terebon I with the support of Chrysaphius. The result of this is the crushing of the Ghassanid invasion in 490 during the reign of King Ziyad I.

I was thinking that since Trabzous suffering from raids and taxation, it is not a happy place. Holy men and Monks begin to radicalize and peasant uprisings occur. Armenian/Persian influence grows and the local leaders declare independence seeking to preserve their trade connections and free themselves from Roman oppression. This starts a chain reaction, as it was a very prosperous place, (whoever is in power in Rome) is in a very bad situation. Unable to pay taxes Attila invades again in 451, destroying every inch of the walls of Byzantium and making his way into anatolia.

These are some of my piece meal ideas so far but I still need to read up on many different topics for this.

I am thinking the Ostrogoths will form a new kingdom over the remnants of the Byzantine empire. Probably under Theodoric Strabo a chieftan of the Thracian goths and brother of the influential ex-roman barbarian general Flavius Adabur Aspar.
 
Last edited:
I picked up The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians By Peter J. Heather.

The book is absolutely chock full of facts and he does a good job of letting us know his theories while giving us an overview of other points of view.

There are some interesting tid-bits though:

An early imperial Roman Legion of about 5,000 men required 225 tonnes of grain and 13.5 tonnes of fodder per day.

Monogamous marriages tend to produce a male heir for no more than three generations, about 20% of all monogamous marriages produce no children.

According to Diocletian's Prices Edict a wagon of wheat doubled in price for every 50 miles it travelled.
 
Ok, apparently the Huns raided the Eastern Empire in 395 AD, amazingly across the Caucasus through Armenia and sieging Antioch. But I can't really find any details in this book or on the internet. It kind of adds credence to the idea that Attila might have decided to raid Persia by marching north east over the the Black Sea and attacking through the Caucuses again. This kind of makes sense for a much more eastern focused Hunnic Empire. Because I think Attila would realize that Anatolia and the east are much richer than the West (since the West had been ransacked by other barbarians already). I was looking back on AH.com to see if other people thought about this POD and one of the criticisms was "how do the Huns cross the Bosporus?" One thing I decided was that no matter what Attila will be literally declared the Scourge of God. There won't likely be any Romans willing to help him across. The Roman Navy will have a lot of incentive to stop him considering the sacking he will commit in Anatolia. I don't think we should count out the likelyhood of Barbarian States ever dominating the straits though. The Vandals of Africa after all defeated a much larger Roman Navy. In the east Theodosius built a Sea Wall in Constantinople and built up the fleet in Alexandria all in response to the Vandals and their piracy. So after the sacking of 448, Attila might take his loot and go east. He would likely gather more Nomadic troops who will rally to his banner and eager for more loot. In about 449 I could see him crossing the Caucuses and attacking either Anatolia or Persia.

I have also been thinking about the outcomes in the West. I haven't quite gotten into the Imperial situation vis a vis Falvius Aetius and Valentinian. If Aetius would still be under suspicion by Valentinian or not is a up in the air question. But there is a question of how the Visigoths of Toulouse and Spain handle succession. After all Theodoric I won't die at the Cataulanian planes, and he might be able to have more say in his successor or he could be murdered like many of the barbarian Kings. Except for his eldest Thorismund who fought on the side of Rome, they all were very expansionist guys.

Another Barbarian succession that would be interesting is the succession of the Franks. I am not sure though if it was the succession of Merovitch (legendary founder of the Merovingian dynasty) or some unnamed Ripuarian Frank. I've found one interesting source But it's on some guys conspiracy alternate history site. but despite this the claims seem credible. It's from the 1840's and the author William Herbert who also wrote a very good Epic poem about Attila. If William Herbert is correct, Merovitch was a good ally of Rome and a friend of Aetius. I can imagine a more powerful Aetius would also lead to a more powerful Merovitch. However I can see the other Frankish claimants not giving up so easily so I imagine 450 the Romans having to fight war over this.

The Murder of Aetius was a big deal; if he's not murdered then it's likely his son Gaudentius will be the next Emperor. I could see the Western Roman Empire, ruling over Gaul and Italy, and maintaining an alliance with the Visigoths in Iberia. According to Wikipedia, Aetius' murder was orchestrated by one: Petronius Maximus. He was a real bastard and also wacked the Emperor Valentinian in order to take the Throne for himself. His breaking of a marriage treaty with Geiseric led to the sacking of Rome. I am not sure why there were no defenders of rome when the Vandals came, so if Petronius still carries out his plan. Perhaps there might be a legion or two to defend Rome (since the Gaulic situation will be much more stable). A Petronius run empire would a be an interesting interval.

Despite all this, even if the Western Roman Empire hangs on, I think you have to take into account that the age of Migrations are not over yet. Slavs, Avars, and others will be moving into Europe. One group that likely won't be moving in will be the Lombards. It seems like they received money by the Eastern Empire. Without Eastern Empire support I don't think they would try to invade the West.
 
Last edited:
Here's a cool image of a Gothic Orthodox Empire:

220px-Pechat_of_Archdiocese_of_Goths_of_True_Orthodox_Christian.jpg


I like how they draw Attila with horns:
zpage059.gif


Just a reminder that the Huns are crazy bastards:
ConeheadSkullHun2.jpg
 
I picked up The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians By Peter J. Heather.

The book is absolutely chock full of facts and he does a good job of letting us know his theories while giving us an overview of other points of view.

There are some interesting tid-bits though:

An early imperial Roman Legion of about 5,000 men required 225 tonnes of grain and 13.5 tonnes of fodder per day.

Monogamous marriages tend to produce a male heir for no more than three generations, about 20% of all monogamous marriages produce no children.

According to Diocletian's Prices Edict a wagon of wheat doubled in price for every 50 miles it travelled.

Thanks for the tidbits. I just added them to my notes for future writing use.
 
Top