What would happen if after Justinian conquers Italy, the Byzantines hold onto it without the Lombards invading? How long would it take for Italy to recover from the Gothic War?
Byzantines hold onto Italy
- Thread starter joeyanonymous
- Start date
Philippe le Bel
Banned
Firstly, why don't the Lombards invade, where do they go instead? If they don't invade Italy, chances are that some other peoples will very soon, since Italy at that point was just waiting to be conquered. Devastated, undermanned, undersupplied...I can't imagine that Justinian's fantastic mishandling of the Gothic War would translate into an administration that is any good at all. The remaining Italian and Gothic population would welcome any ruler that's not a Greek, at this point. Chances are that administrators and legions jump ship as soon as invasion begins.
I don't think the byzantines can hold italy long term.
However, what if it wasn't the byzantines that did? The goths did, at least according to wikipedia, offer to make belisarius the western emperor. Belisarius was a hell of a loyal guy, so I doubt he would betray justinian, but, if we entertain the thought that he could, how would he do? Obviously, he is an amazing general, and most likely would have the support of a decent portion if not all of his army, along with the goths themselves. Could a restored western roman empire fight off byzantine attempts to retake it, or would belisarius be defeated by one of the other generals. Say, narses?
However, what if it wasn't the byzantines that did? The goths did, at least according to wikipedia, offer to make belisarius the western emperor. Belisarius was a hell of a loyal guy, so I doubt he would betray justinian, but, if we entertain the thought that he could, how would he do? Obviously, he is an amazing general, and most likely would have the support of a decent portion if not all of his army, along with the goths themselves. Could a restored western roman empire fight off byzantine attempts to retake it, or would belisarius be defeated by one of the other generals. Say, narses?
There were Byzantines in Italy for a loooooong time and I assumed this thread was about a later PoD (i.e. no Normans).
If Justinian was that incompetent I agree that Byzantine rule wouldn't last without pretenders/outsiders seizing control, but to say the whole peninsula was against Greek rule diminishes the cultural/ethnic Greek presence in Magna Graecia.
I like the Norman PoD because I would be very interested in the prospects of an independent Greek Sicily, something less likely in the Migration Era IMO.
If Justinian was that incompetent I agree that Byzantine rule wouldn't last without pretenders/outsiders seizing control, but to say the whole peninsula was against Greek rule diminishes the cultural/ethnic Greek presence in Magna Graecia.
I like the Norman PoD because I would be very interested in the prospects of an independent Greek Sicily, something less likely in the Migration Era IMO.
I think you need an earlier POD, with a faster and less destructive reconquest of Italy, for the Byzantines to hold on to Italy. Maybe Belisarius accepts the first offer the Goths made - to let them keep Italy north of the Po river as foederati, where they were more concentrated anyway - and that leaves them in place to help out against the Lombards, who might not even invade at all if they know they're going to face heavy resistance.
This leaves peninsular Italy more stable, more populated, wealthier and more capable to support the Empire later on, when the Slavs arrive, as I don't think these invasions would be easily butterflied.
In the long term, I think you end up with a Western Emperor in Rome or Ravenna, set up to coordinate defences in Italy, who then splits up with Constantinople on religious grounds.
This leaves peninsular Italy more stable, more populated, wealthier and more capable to support the Empire later on, when the Slavs arrive, as I don't think these invasions would be easily butterflied.
In the long term, I think you end up with a Western Emperor in Rome or Ravenna, set up to coordinate defences in Italy, who then splits up with Constantinople on religious grounds.
You know, if southern Italy is securely Byzantine, and northern Italy is a war zone between Franks, Lombards, and Goths, the Byzantines would be well positioned to move in on the north, and all they would have to do is wait a couple decades.
Might Belisarius accept this deal if a crisis in the East forced his hand? Suppose Justinian "cuts his losses" and forces Belisarius to head out against the Persians or something?
Eh, it's a gamble. The Germanic confederacies were quite fluid, so one major Frankish victory later you might have the Goths and Lombards as subjects of the Franks-proper to smite the Byzantines together.
Granted, it will then take just one Byzantine victory to unravel that coalition again, too.
Pennsylvania
Banned
Assuming there is a Butterfly net on Historical events outside of Italy, a "Byzantine Sicily" would be the last surviving remnant of the Roman Empire from 1453 (when Constantinople falls) to the Italian Unification wars.
Which would lead to the interesting question of whether to give control of all of Italy to the Byzantine rump state or to the House of Savoy.
Without such a Butterfly net, I honestly don't know what could happen.
Which would lead to the interesting question of whether to give control of all of Italy to the Byzantine rump state or to the House of Savoy.
Without such a Butterfly net, I honestly don't know what could happen.
This is a very unlikely scenario, but it's interesting. A female Palaiologos heir marries into another Italian house, and they assert Roman continuity and pursue reuniting the Italian peninsula and environs? Maybe "Roman Sicily" passes to the Montferrat Palaiogos dynasty?
Actually Secondotto, Marquess of Montferrat and Maria of Sicily are in the same Age group.