Cry of the Augustinians - A Late Antiquity TL

[Richard Drummond]

“We are persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed”
- 2 Corinthians 4:9​

Excerpt: Augustinians, from Christian Martyrs to Servants of Satan - Earbal Firciconis, College of Leptinia (AD 1880)

Writing during the reign of Meicislaus, Pius Midicensis dwelt at length on the brutality of the Vandals in their conquest of Libya. The brutality of the event was illustrated by the savagery of the Vandals and their singling out of clerics and members of the Catholic Church. Pius goes on further to describe how the Vandals tortured priests and bishops so that they would reveal the location of their churches’ wealth. Such depiction gave rise to the traditional understanding of the Vandal conquest as persecution, as an early example of what was to become the dominant characteristic of their rule in Libya, excluding the reign of Gento (455 - 82 AD).

In the early nineteenth century, Caphada Coccoitchnus paved the way for a revision of traditional interpretations of the Vandal period by presenting highly critical readings of contemporary historiography. However, since his revolutionary take on the Vandal historiographical tradition, eyes have been turned to Augustine Hipponensis for a more specific source of this historiographical tradition of the Vandals as persecutors.

Sources contemporary to the Vandal conquest (429-39 AD) did not universally reflect the religious overtones of Pius Midicensis’ account, nor did they unanimously depict the Vandals as persecutors. Rather, they focused upon the material destruction and loss along with the horrors of war. Augustine, however, was the exception; his ep. ccxxviii constituting a turning point as the first theological interpretation of the Vandals as a threat to the salvation of Nicene souls. Previous scholars who took the bishop of Hippo’s description of the Vandals at face value, and a confirmation of Possidius and Pius’ later accounts, missed an important point: Augustine’s transformation of the potential violence and destruction by an unnamed bishop, in a lost letter quoted by Augustine, into certainty. Augustine, looking back on his life’s work against heretics and Donatists, considered the imminent Vandal conquest as the destruction of a century of efforts by the Nicene Church to triumph over its ecclesiastic foes in Libya. This is undoubtedly why he interpreted the arrival of the conquerors as spelling the eternal death of Nicene Christians, and cast the future actions of the Vandals as certain persecution in waiting.

Possidius lived during the Vandal conquest and suffered exile at the hands of the Vandals. He too included Augustine’s ep. ccxxviii in his Life of Augustine and yet did not explicitly label the conquest as a persecution. Rather, it was Prosper of Aquitaine, another of Augustine’s pupils, who resurrected the depiction of the Vandals as persecutors. Another stage in the creation of the Vandal historiographical persona was reached with Quodvultdeus, the bishop of Carthage, being exiled to Campania in 439. Witnessing the increasing success of the Vandal Church in attracting converts amongst Nicenes, Quodvultdeus diverged from Augustine’s teachings and adopted an eschatological and millenarian perspective in his depiction of the Vandals as precursors of the Antichrist. All these viewpoints finally came together in the account of Pius Midicensis, who was too young to witness the conquest himself. Thus, in reply to the anonymous bishops seeking advice in the face of the invasions, Augustine established the framework that became prevalent in Nicene sources’ depiction of the viewpoint such as Possidius, Prosper, Quodvultdeus and Pius Midicensis.

The Vandal conquest was not a peaceful event; it was an event of unquestionable violence that led to the death and suffering of thousands. Famously, Coccoitchnus proclaimed the violence as ‘the standard practices of war’. This labelling of such violence as typical in such circumstances was not an attempt at excusing it or even dismissing it as unimportant; it was simply that contemporary valuation should not be applied to interpretation of the past. An example being the rape of nuns by Vandals as attested by the rescripts of Pope Leo. Such behaviour, though unfortunate, was a regular occurrence in both ancient warfare and still continues into contemporary times. The tetralogy of war - theft, rape, murder and arson - was after all not unique to the Vandals. The cruel conquests of the Vandals is not up for debate, whether or not they deliberately targeted the Nicenean Church is the question.

Augustine’s account of the Vandals contrasts to other accounts from contemporary observers, primarily because Augustine was only able to observe the conquests up to the fall of Hippo Regius after which he passed away. Other contemporary authors, for example Quodvultdeus, wrote after the Vandal conquest of Carthage which was a turning point resulting in the more hostile depictions of the exiled bishop. Another contemporary author would be Hydatius who is unique in that he documents their passage through the Iberian Peninsula before they crossed into Libya. Hydatius’ account reveals that Priscillianists, not Vandals, were the main concern, from a religious perspective, for Nicene clerics at this time. However, his account of the Vandals’ crossing into Africa follows African sources which transmitted the Augustinian interpretation of the Vandals as heretical persecutors.

Following the Vandal crossing into Africa in 429 CE, Augustine's colleagues grew restless in the face of the imminent invasion. A certain Quodvultdeus, not to be confused with the future bishop of Carthage,wrote to Augustine to get his advice on the behaviour that bishops should adopt in the face of the Vandal advance. He sought support from Augustine for his desire to flee his city. Augustine responded by saying that he should stay where he was as long as there were faithful to minister to, citing Psalm xxxi, ‘Be our protecting God and fortified place’. This was a significant shift in tactic from the previous Christian tradition to obey Matthew x.23, ‘But when they persecute you in this city, flee to another’. Augustine going against the precept of Scripture caused Honoratus of Thiaba to write to Augustine from which we see the earliest descriptions of the Vandal conquest of Africa. Honoratus’ descriptions of the horrors of the conquests was entirely speculative and did not include religious motivation and yet it was these claims which later accounts expanded upon. The bishop of Hippo’s reply only helped to blur the distinction between potential and reality while adding a theological interpretation of the conquest on top, thereby providing a conceptual framework for understanding the Vandals as persecutors.

In ep. ccxxviii. 4, Augustine quotes the words of ‘a certain bishop’ who wrote: ‘If the Lord commanded us to flee in those persecutions in which the fruit of martyrdom is found, how much more ought we to flee useless sufferings when there is a hostile invasion of the barbarians?’. It seems that for the bishop, be it Quodvultdeus or Honoratus, that the arrival of the Vandals was a hostile invasion, a war of conquest, without any specific religious motivation. These passages make a clear distinction between martyrdom and useless sufferings, the latter describing the current Vandal context. The mention of Spanish bishops who fled after their flock had themselves left shows the same basic point that the Vandals were causing devastation, but without religious motivation.

The letter also included a brief description of what Catholics might expect from the Vandals. Augustine thus quotes the certain bishop as writing: ‘If we must remain in the churches, I do not see what good we are going to do for ourselves or for the people other than seeing men being slain, women being raped, churches being burned, and ourselves not faltering under torture when they ask of us what we do not have.’ Augustine answered: ‘and yet on account of these events, which are uncertain, we ought not to commit the certain wrong of abandoning our duty, without which the destruction of the people is certainly not in matters of this life but in those of the next life.’ Augustine correctly acknowledged that the Vandals had not yet committed any of these actions and that the author simply feared potential actions, a crucial detail missed by previous scholars.

Augustine wrote that 'when he who can escape does not flee from the onslaught of the enemy and so does not abandon the ministry of Christ, without which men could neither live a Christian life nor become Christians, he finds a greater reward of love than he who flees, not for his brethren's sake but for his own, and when taken captive does not deny Christ but suffers martyrdom'. This implies that the invasion would result in Vandal attempts to force captives to ‘deny Christ’ putting resistors to death. By adding this religious element, Augustine's depiction of the conquest turned it into a holy war. In addition, by insinuating that the Vandals would create martyrs, Augustine implied that they were already persecutors. The original worries related to a war of conquest from the unknown bishop did not contain these theological concerns. In turning the useless sufferings of the unnamed bishop into martyrdom, moreover, Augustine gave the main function of martyrdom: to give significant meaning to meaningless suffering. This was nothing new for Augustine, who had already argued that any average Christian could find an opportunity for martyrdom in daily activities, as when bed-ridden Christians resisted having recourse to amulets.

A key question is why Augustine insisted on this religious subtext when he had excused essentially the same list of atrocities as the woes of war for the Visigothic sack of Rome in the City of God. The difference is the local, African, ecclesiastical context in which Augustine had been a key player throughout his episcopal career. Augustine's concept of the two cities is at the centre of his thinking on the barbarian invasions. In the words of Augustine's biographer, Possidius, 'the man of God did not believe and think as other men did regarding the causes from which this most fierce assault and devastation of the foe had arisen and come to pass'. Possidius is here undoubtedly referring to the more earthly worries that dominated Honoratus of Thiaba's account and his own, which might well have been the norm at the time. For Augustine, spiritual death was far worse than the violence of invasion, which explains his argument that clerics ought to remain alongside their community no matter what. This also explains Augustine's transformation of the invasion into a theological conflict, for the Vandals were Homoian Christians.

Augustine connects the Vandals with the devil, anticipating that they might incite Nicenes to convert to their faith, as Quodvultdeus will later attest. Augustine refers to Athanasius as a positive example of a bishop who fled in the right circumstances because he was personally persecuted; therefore he did not have a flock to tend to. It seems hardly coincidental that Athanasius was also 'persecuted' by a Homoian ruler, Constantius II (337-61 AD), and Augustine specified that 'the Catholic faith was defended against the Arian heretics by his voice and zeal'. Augustine's polarising interpretation, however, was unique among contemporaries of the Vandal conquest, for it is only later, through the accounts of Prosper of Aquitaine, Quodvultdeus and Pius Midicensis that Augustine's version became the consecrated Nicene vision of
events. By contrast, the contemporary accounts of Capreolus and Possidius focused on earthly concerns.

Spoiler: SUMMARY

SUMMARY:
455: Gento is installed as King of the Vandals and Alans.
482: Gento, King of the Vandals and Alans, is overthrown by a noble coup.

Spoiler: LIST OF MONARCHS

LIST OF MONARCHS:
Kings of the Vandals and Alans
Hasdingian Dynasty

1. Gaiseric: 2 November 439 - 13 March 453 (13 years, 4 months, 11 days)
2. Huneric: 13 March 453 - 28 June 455 (2 years, 3 months, 15 days)
3. Gento: 28 June 455 - 17 October 482 (27 years, 3 months, 19 days)

 

[Sarufiyyun]

The line that mentions the Vandal Church is having success converting the locals seems to indicate that despite the reputation of the Vandals as destructive invaders, they are doing a decent job integrating their subjects into the new order than IOTL. The Hasdings were fascinating in that they used Eudoxia to craft themselves as both successors to the Roman emperors (and Theodosian dynasty) yet crafting an autonomous post-Roman, African identity by supporting the usage of ancient Punic symbols in their coins and offering patronage to the Romanized African literati who were willing to sing the Vandals' praises.

 

[Richard Drummond]

The line that mentions the Vandal Church is having success converting the locals seems to indicate that despite the reputation of the Vandals as destructive invaders, they are doing a decent job integrating their subjects into the new order than IOTL. The Hasdings were fascinating in that they used Eudoxia to craft themselves as both successors to the Roman emperors (and Theodosian dynasty) yet crafting an autonomous post-Roman, African identity by supporting the usage of ancient Punic symbols in their coins and offering patronage to the Romanized African literati who were willing to sing the Vandals' praises.

The Vandals do indeed do better than IOTL and Arianism as a whole is a stronger faith. The Vandals will flip-flop between pro-Roman and anti-Roman factions until they stabilize.

 

[Sceonn]

Interesting, but the name changes are kinda pointless.

 

[Richard Drummond]

Interesting, but the name changes are kinda pointless.

Thanks, however, you have to remember that the geographical terms will differ due to butterflies. Take North Africa for example. OTL it applies to the region because the continent is known as Africa. However, in CotA the entire concept of continents is different.

 

[Sceonn]

Thanks, however, you have to remember that the geographical terms will differ due to butterflies. Take North Africa for example. OTL it applies to the region because the continent is known as Africa. However, in CotA the entire concept of continents is different.

These names are different in every language today, I mean, Arabs and North Africans don't call the Mediterranean that, they have their own word for it distinct from the Latin and Latin derived names it has just like the Greeks and Russians. Also the concept of continents as we know it only emerged during the age of Sail, so that's a non-factor in a story set in the Migration Period.

If you're going to use this alt-language then you could put the real name in parentheses instead. I didn't enjoy having constantly scrolling up and down. I was reading this on my smartphone for reference.

 

[Richard Drummond]

These names are different in every language today, I mean, Arabs and North Africans don't call the Mediterranean that, they have their own word for it distinct from the Latin and Latin derived names it has just like the Greeks and Russians. Also the concept of continents as we know it only emerged during the age of Sail, so that's a non-factor in a story set in the Migration Period.

If you're going to use this alt-language then you could put the real name in parentheses instead. I didn't enjoy having constantly scrolling up and down. I was reading this on my smartphone for reference.

You make a good point. I shall use parentheses in the next update and every update in the future.

 

[Richard Drummond]

"Death is nothing to us, since when we are, death has not come, and when death has come, we are not"
- Epicurus (February 341 - 270 BC)
​

Excerpt: Occidental Emperors of the 5th Century, The Theodosians and Liuvingians - Madelgarda Moniades, Theedlijk Gyngthitzheidthing Vrangonrijk (1852 AD)

Now the most powerful man in the Occident except for maybe the Emperor himself, Bonifacius had many issues to face. He had invested his resources in developing a power base in Africa but now that his former lands were in the hands of the Vandals, he was left with close to nothing. On the continent, however, he had his Gothic bucellarii and most importantly, the favour of the imperial court and the emperor’s mother, Galla Placidia. Bonifacius’ defeat of Aetius was a welcome event for her. He was a threatening figure now replaced by the less ambitious Bonifacius, who despite rumours, did not have eyes set on the imperial throne for himself or his son-in-law. Nonetheless, he still had considerable influence over imperial policy that would only increase over time, increasing especially in 437 when Placidia’s tenure as regent ended once Valentinian III reached majority and once again when she passed away on July 451.

In 434, he had obtained the rank of magnificus vir parens patriusque noster due to his “protector” role over Galla Placidia and Valentinian III. At the same time, he had found a new area to build his power base outside of Italia. Aetius’ death had left a vacuum within Gaul and Bonifacius sought to fill the vacuum. His career, after all, had begun in Gaul combating the Goths and would first be able to prove himself militarily against the Burgundian king, Gundahar who had ruled over his people since their crossing of the Rhine in 406/407. In 413, the Burgundians had been settled by magister militum Constantius on the left bank of the Rhine as foederati. However, this region would prove to be unsafe as increasing pressure from the Huns in the 430s forced the aged Gundahar to attack the province of Belgica Prima in 435. Bonifacius defeated the Burgundians but confirmed their right to a kingdom.

Their situation was still a precarious one. Hunnic raids continued unabated and many displaced men would find employment in Bonifacius’ armies playing a great role in the suppression of Bagaudae revolts. Other displaced families would settle in northern Gaul where they were subsumed into the Alanian ethnicity. The defeat of the Burgundians would be a powerful victory for Bonifacius. Not only had he increased his prestige among the Gallo-Roman aristocrats, but he had also found himself a new source of troops. Bonifacius’ Burgundians were first tested in Armorica the following year when Bagaudae revolted under a figure named Tibatto. The year later, he left Gaul to attend Valentinian III’s wedding ceremony in Constantinople to Licinia Eudoxia.

At the same time, the Franks were plundering Roman settlements in the region helping worsen the grim situation in Gaul. Theodoric, king of the Visigoths, took advantage of this to spread his own control within Gaul. He was, however, resisted by Litorius at Narbo Martius [Narbonne]. Despite his efforts, the Roman was defeated and the last Roman commander to perform pagan rites was killed in battle. With the capture of Narbo Martius, Theodoric now had access to the Mediterranean and control over roads to the Pyrenees. Hispania had been split off from the rest of the Occidental Empire. It is unknown what Bonicatius had been doing during this time as he seemingly only reacts to Theodoric I in 437 after the emperor’s wedding. He liberated Narbo Martius and accepted Theodoric I’s peace offer. The Visigothic state was reduced to its former borders and its sovereignty recognized. In celebration of his victory, Bonifatius was honoured with a statue erected by the Senate.

Nevertheless, the decaying state of the empire meant that Gaul was still rife with problems regarding continuing Bagaudae uprisings. The Burgundian soldiers were joined by Alans settled along the Loire, including Aurelianum [Orleans], due to the levels of unrest in the region. Hispania, meanwhile, was in a worse state only exacerbated by the fall of Narbo Martius to Theodoric I. After quelling a new wave of Bagaudae uprisings in Armorica in 440, he appointed his son-in-law Sebastianus Magister Militum per Hispanias who marched into Hispania to put down the Bagaudae uprisings in Tarraconensis the following year. By 445, he had quelled the Bagaudae in Hispania though the flame of revolt remerged in Armorica once again with an uprising in 448. Goar’s Alans played a prominent role in putting the rebellion down allowing the Alans to replace the Burgundians as the prominent Germanic soldiers in the region. Back in Hispania, another Bagaudae uprising broke out in 450 and the rebels sacked Tyriasso, Caesaraugusta and Illerdensus. The Suebi exploited this rebellion and assisted the Bagaudae in their revolt.

Besides the Bagaudae, another threat to Gaul was the Franks. It was at the Battle of Turonum [Tours] that he made a name for himself defeating the Frankish besieging force only to have to face an attack under king Clodio in Belgica Secunda. Majorian would play a prominent role in ambushing Chlodio’s army in a joint operation with Bonifacius. Relations with the Franks remained tense until Clodio passed away in 449 and was succeeded by Merovech, a presumed son of Chlodio who served as an ambassador in Roma. Bonifacius had hoped to utilize the Frankish claimant as a puppet who already had ties to Roma unlike his more ‘barbarian’ competitors.

The biggest challenge to Bonifatius, however, would come from the outside. The Huns always had an unstable relationship with Bonifacius ever since their backing of Aetius. Conflict between the Romans and Huns was common in Pannonia where the Huns sought to settle along the Savus River [Sava River]. Nonetheless, Bonifacius made some use of Hunnic mercenaries with a brief hiatus during the power struggle between Bleda and Attila. In 452, the emperor’s sister, Justa Grata Honoria, tried to escape from a forced marriage to a ‘safe’ senator without ambition. In response, Honoria sent a plea for aid to Bleda; an act that would lead to not only her death but the invasion of Italia by the Huns. Bleda had already intended to invade Italy as the Orient was running out of easy plunder and this plea for help from Justa Grata Honoria was the excuse Bleda had been looking for besides pure plunder.

Bonifacius garrisoned Aquileia as Bleda crossed the Julian Alps. He was, however, defeated and forced to retreat. Aquileia was sacked and northern Italia as Bleda marched on Ravenna. Valentinian III fled from the imperial court to Roma while Bonifacius failed to raise a large enough force to hold back the Hunnic tide. The army he did raise was camped at Bononia (Bologna) to block the roads through the Apennines that led to Ravenna and Roma. With a smaller force, Bonifacius harassed the Huns sapping their strength and slowing their advance. Bleda’s forces, nonetheless, reached the Padus [Po river] where an attempt to make peace was made with Pope Leo I heading the embassy. The peace talks were unsuccessful and both Bonifacius and Bleda were forced into combat.

The Battle of the Padus was fought on 22 August 453. Due to its location in Italia, Bonifacius commanded a larger than usual percentage of Roman troops. He had made requests for troops from Theodoric I but had no response. Allegedly, Theodoric had learnt of the strength of Bleda’s army and hoped to take advantage of the ensuing chaos if Bonifacius was defeated. The battle commenced when Bleda’s Gepid troops were attacked by Alans while crossing the Padus. Bleda had sent another force of Germanic vassals in the goal of tricking Bonifacius into believing a buildup was occurring at that stretch of river. This he did and a large portion of the Roman army was moved to stop the predicted Hunnic crossing. Kept distracted, Bonifacius was unable to halt the actual crossing taking place further to the west. A number of Romans were not engaged with the Gepid crossing and sought to halt Bleda’s crossing. Despite bloody skirmishing, the Romans were repulsed and the crossing completed while the Gepids remained separated by the Padus from the main force.

Skirmishing between Bleda and Bonifacius began as the commanders positioned their forces. Bonifacius sought to protect his right flank with the Padus thus weakening the potential of the Huns’ cavalrymen. The Huns were the first to make an offensive move but were repelled by the Romans who would suffer strong losses combating the Ostrogoths who had crossed with Bleda. This stalemate continued and the Gepids attempted to cross the Padus to strike the Romans from their rear. Suffering moderate losses, most of the Gepid troops were forced to retreat although several soldiers had successfully crossed led by a young officer, Odoacer. Under his command, the Gepids fell upon Bonifacius’ household unit of Gothic bucellarii and Bonifacius himself, now an elderly man was slain. Despite this great victory, the Romans defeated the Huns. Constant harassment and lack of supplies had left the Huns weakened and fearing being trapped and slaughtered south of the Padus, Bleda eventually called off his troops in an organized retreat aided by Odoacer’s Gepids who kept enough Romans distracted to avoid being pursued.

Instead of retreating north of the Padus, Bleda continued to march south plundering the region to resupply his forces. The Roman army had been left in disarray with the death of Bonifacius and defection was rampant allowing Bleda to continue operating in the region despite his own losses. The troops north of the Padus were regrouped and attempted a third successful crossing of the Padus ending an attempt at regrouping by slaying Bonifacius’ immediate successor on the battlefield, Maximinius. They met up with the main force at Bononia before Bleda marched on Ravenna laying the city to siege. Along the way, he suffered small scale attacks by the Romans ending any chances of Bleda accepting negotiation attempts. On 24 September 453, the gates of Ravenna were opened through treachery and the city was sacked for three days. Many of the city’s great buildings were ransacked and all moveable goods were stolen all over the city. The basilicas were emptied and gardens were burnt to the ground along with vast swathes of the city. Many citizens were captured to be later ransomed, sold into slavery, raped or killed.

Saints were produced in the sack with Saint Aemilia being tortured to the brink of death but saved by her son from being raped. It is said that God had lifted her soul during the brief period of respite given by her infant son who was killed on the spot, Saint Sabinus. Both Saint Aemilia and Sabinus would later become the patron saints of Ravenna. Despite the sack’s famed brutality in storytelling, it was somewhat restrained by the standards of war. The slaughter of the inhabitants was limited and only a few buildings were destroyed completely. Nonetheless, Bleda would return to Pannonia following the sack instead of marching onto Rome due to logistical issues that had already been pushed to the brink by seizing Ravenna.

With the death of Bonifacius at the Po and the sack of Ravenna, a void was created in Occidental Roman politics. He, however, left a strong legacy for himself due to his skill as a military commander. His effective rule of the Occident from 431-453 saw a stabilizing of the borders even defeating Bleda in battle. Had he not been killed in battle, it is likely he would have slain the Huns south of the Padus instead of the army devolving into a disorganised mob. Even in death, however, his legacy continued to be seen with the invasion of Africa by Hugelicus continuing from Bonifacius’ preparations.

Spoiler: SUMMARY

434: Bonifacius is granted the title of magnificus vir parens patriusque noster.
435: Gundahar of the Burgundians raids Belgica Prima. He is defeated by Bonifacius who reaffirms the rights of the Burgundians to their kingdom. He begins employing Burgundians on a large scale.
435: Frankish raiders plunder Colonia Claudia and Augusta Treverorum.
436: Bonifacius suppresses a revolt of Bagaudae in Armorica led by Tibatto.
436: Theodoric I defeats Roman general, Litorius, at the Battle of Narbo Martius giving the Visigoths control over the city and access to the Meditteranean.
437: Valentinian III reaches his age of maturity and marries Licinia Eudoxia in Constantinople. Galla Placidia’s tenure as regent comes to an end.
437: Theodoric I is defeated at the Second Battle of Narbo Martius by Bonifacius. The Visigoths are reduced to their former borders but their sovereignty is recognized by the Roman Empire.
440: Alans are settled along the Loire, including Aurelianum after a Bagaudae uprising was quelled.
441: Bonifacius’ son-in-law, Sebastianus, is appointed magister militum per hispanias in a campaign against the Bagaudae and Suebi with aid from the Vandals and Goths.
445: Sebastianus quells the Bagaudae uprisings in Tarraconensis.
448: Bagaudae rise up in Armorica to be put down by the Alans of Goar.
449: Chlodio, king of the Franks, passes away. The Romans install Merovech as his successor.
450: Bagaudae rise up in Hispania sacking Tyriasso, Caesaraugusta and Illerdensus with assistance from the Suebi.
452: Justa Grata Honoria sends her ring to Bleda the Hun in a plea for help after being forced into a marriage by her brother, Valentinian III.
453: Bleda invades Italia sacking Aquileia where he defeats Bonifacius’ first army. Bonifacius’ second army would be victorious at the Battle of the Po although he would be killed resulting in the disintegration of his army allowing for the sacking of Ravenna by the Huns.

Spoiler: LIST OF LEADERS

Comes et Magister Utriusque Militiae of the Occidental Roman Empire

1. Flavius Constantius: 411 - 421
2. Castinus: 422 - 425
3. Flavius Constantius Felix: 425 - 430
4. Bonifatius: 431 - 22 August 453
5. Sebastianus: 22 August 453 - TBA

 

[Richard Drummond]

"My fame is built upon your failure"
- Bleda the Hun (390 - 457 AD)​

The Huns were ruled by the brothers Rugila and Octar of the gens Chunorum with a geographical division where Rugila ruled over the Eastern Huns while Octar ruled over the Western Huns. However, in 430, he became the sole ruler over the Huns when Octar was killed during a military campaign against the Burgundians. It was his court that Aetius fled to after his initial defeat by Bonifacius. He already had a good relationship with Rugila and thus was able to raise an army in an attempt to regain his old office with the province of ceding part of Pannonia Prime to Rugila. Eventually, the Huns would strike a deal with Bonifacius allowing for a ceding of the region. In the Orient, he had led many incursions into Thracia having menaced Constantinople in 422 forcing the Romans into paying 350 pounds of gold annually.

Some tribes from the Hunnic confederation fled to the service of Theodosius II in 434. In response, Rugila sent his experienced diplomat Esla to Constantinople demanding the return of all fugitives, otherwise, peace would be terminated. His death soon after, however, ended his military buildup as the Hunnic realm was divided between Bleda and Attila, the sons of his brother Mundzuk. Like Octar and Rugila before them, the two were dual kings of the Huns. The sons sought to continue their uncle’s ambitions and they marched south of the Danube forcing the Romans into negotiating a peace agreement. The annual tribute was raised to 700 pounds of gold and the fugitives were surrendered to be crucified by the Huns for their conversion to Christianity. Among the crucified were two of royal descent, Mamas and Atakam. Other demands included the opening of Roman markets to Hunnic traders and a ransom of eight solidi for each Roman taken prisoner by the Huns.

Bleda was the eldest of the two brothers but it was said that Attila was the more violent of the two with the elder brother famed for his Mauri dwarf Zerco who he took on campaign wearing a suit of armour made especially for him. At first, the two worked together to bargain with Theodosius II’s envoys before returning to their territories north of the Danube to consolidate their strength giving the emperor an opportunity to strengthen the walls of Constantinople which included the city’s first sea wall. The next few years were spent attempting an invasion of the Persian Empire but a devastating defeat in Armenia forced them into abandoning these ambitions and the attention of the Huns have turned once again to Europe.

Therefore, the Huns attacked the merchants at the markets on the north bank of the Danube despite the treaty signed with the Romans protecting the Romans. Further war was threatened by the brothers who accused the Romans of failing to fulfil their treaty obligations and that the Romans had desecrated the royal Hun graves on the Danube’s north bank.

The river defences were stripped due to the need to transfer troops elsewhere to Carthage following its fall to Gaiseric in 440 and the invasion of Armenia by Bahram V in 441. This allowed the Huns to continue their ransacking with a crossing of the Danube laying waste to cities and riverine forts in Illyria. The advance began at Margus where the Bishop, who had desecrated the royal graves, betrayed the city to the Huns once handed over to the Huns by the Romans. Margus, Viminacium, Singidunum [Belgrade] and Sirmium [Sremska Mitrovica] were all sacked by the Huns before they halted in 441 giving Theodosius time to recall his troops from Libya [North Africa]. A large new issue of coins to finance operations against the Huns was ordered and believing he had prepared enough, Theodosius II felt it safe to refuse the demands of the Hunnic brothers.

In response, the brothers renewed their campaign the following year overruning Ratiaria’s military centres and successfully laying siege to Naissus [Nis] where they famously made use of their battering rams and other siege engines that were new to the Hun army. Following these successes, they pushed along the [Nisava] taking Serdica [Sofia], Philippopolis [Plovdiv] and Arcadiopolis [Luleburgaz]. A Roman force was destroyed outside the walls of Constantinople and a second at Callipolis [Gelibolu]. The only reason the capital avoided sacking by the Huns was the inability of their siege equipment to breach the walls. Nonetheless, Theodosius II admitted defeat and peace terms were negotiated. The Emperor agreed to hand over 6,000 Roman pounds of gold as punishment for having disobeyed the terms of treaty during the invasion. The yearly tribute was tripled to 2,100 Roman pounds in gold and the ransom for each Roman prisoner was raised to 12 solidi. The brothers withdrew back to their empire and a power struggle ensued between the two after an attempt was made on Attila by Bleda. However, after a brief fight, Attila was slain in battle ensuring Bleda’s sole rule over the Hunnic empire in 444. This left Bleda with only his sons, nephews and his surviving uncle, Oebarsius.

Attila’s sons, Ellac, Dengizich and Ernak fled east onto the steppes or the Orient. Ernak was content serving the Orientals while Dengizich sought to carve out an empire for himself putting him in conflict with the eldest brother, Ellac, who also had ambitions of kingship. Bleda ignored his nephews as he effectively consolidated his rule over the empire despite being around 50. In 446, he did battle with magister militum Arnegisclus who was unable to hold back Bleda and was defeated though he managed to escape with his life after inflicting heavy losses upon the Huns. Nonetheless, the defeat allowed Marcianopolis to fall to the Huns who sacked it thoroughly. While sacking the region, Constantinople was struck by an earthquake ruining parts of the city walls and causing an outbreak of plague. Before an attempt could be made to repair the walls, Bleda laid the city to a long siege just after many of the city’s inhabitants fled during the brief period between the earthquake and the encampment of Bleda outside the city. In 448, rumours of treason terrified Theodosius II who surrendered to the Huns. A tribute of 10,000 pounds of gold was to be paid upfront and 4,000 pounds annually.

Having thoroughly ravaged the Orient, Bleda turned his attention to the Occident where he had previously battled the Burgundians and now sought to subject the remaining Germanics in the region but also plunder the Occident. Fighting mostly occurred in Pannonia which was eventually ceded by Bonifacius due to the tenuous situation in the region. Many Huns found service as mercenaries in Bonifacius’ armies combatting the Goths and Bagaudae. The emperor’s sister, Honoria, sent her ring in 452 to Bleda who used this as an excuse to expand his operations against Pannonia into Italia with his invasion of the peninsula. The execution of Honoria did little to stop Bleda who marched on to Ravenna sacking the Roman capital while Valentinian III fled to Rome. With the Huns came their Gepid, Ostrogoth, Rugian, Scirian, Herul, Thuringian, Alan and Burgundian vassals who, after sacking Ravenna, found employment in the army of Hugelicus to continue their accumulation of wealth as they participated in the invasion of Libya [North Africa].

Bleda, meanwhile, returned to his empire covered in prestige and gold. His position was all but secured after sacking the capital of the Romans. However, he was an aged man suffering from the troubles of old age and he increasingly delegated to his eldest son and expected heir, Basik. In 457, he passed away and the succession of power was smooth. The slight dissent amongst the Germanic vassals was easily put down and the Hunnic empire continued to stretch from the Rhine to the steppes where Basik’s cousins ruled.

Spoiler: SUMMARY

422: A major Hunnic incursion into Thracia menaces Constantinople. The Romans are forced to annually pay 350 pounds of gold.
430: Co-king Octar of the Huns is killed in combat against the Burgundians.
434: Some tribes defect from the Hunnic confederation entering the service of Theodosius II.
434: Rugila, king of the Huns, passes away raising an army to invade Thrace. He is succeeded by Bleda and Attila, the sons of his brother Mundzuk.
435: Bleda and Attila negotiate the return of renegade Huns and increase the annual tribute to 700 pounds of gold.
439: The Huns are decisively defeated in Armenia fighting the Sassanids.
440: The Huns ransack Roman markets north of the Danube.
441: Bahram V invades Armenia.
441: The Huns invade Illyria sacking Margus, Viminacium, Singidunum and Sirmium.
442: Theodosius II withdraws his troops from Libya to combat the Hunnic invasion.
443: The Huns renew their campaigns and force Theodosius II into admitting defeat. The Emperor agrees to hand over 6,000 Roman pounds of gold as punishment for having disobeyed the terms of treaty during the invasion. The yearly tribute is tripled to 2,100 Roman pounds in gold and the ransom for each Roman prisoner is raised to 12 solidi.
444: Bleda attempts to kill Attila sparking a brief power struggle ending with Attila’s death in battle. Bleda becomes the sole king of the Huns.
446: Bleda invades the Orient defeating magister militum Arnegisclus in battle.
447: An earthquake ruins parts of the walls of Constantinople and causes the outbreak of a plague. The Romans were unable to repair the walls in time and Bleda laid the city to siege.
448: Theodosius II surrenders to Bleda the Hun due to fears of traitors going to open the gates of Constantinople. The annual tribute is increased to 4,000 pounds and an immediate payment of 10,000 pounds is made.
457: Bleda passes away and is succeeded by his son Basik in a smooth succession.

Spoiler: LIST OF LEADERS

Kings of the Huns

• Chunorum

1. Balamber: 370s - 390s
2. Uldin: 390s - 412
3. Charaton: 412 - 420s
4. Rugila: 420s - 434
5. Octar: 420s - 430
6. Bleda: 434 - 457
7. Attila: 434 - 444
8. Basik: 457 - N/A

Persian Monarchs

• Shahanshahs of the Sassanid Empire

1. Ardashir I: 224 - February 242
2. Shapur I: 12 April 240 - May 270
3. Hormizd I: May 270 - June 271
4. Bahram I: June 271 - September 274
5. Bahram II: 274 - 293
6. Bahram III: 293
7. Narseh: 293 - 302
8. Hormizd II: 302 - 309
9. Adur Narseh: 309
10. Shapur II: 309 - 379
11. Ardashir II: 379 - 383
12. Shapur III: 383 - 388
13. Bahram IV: 388 - 399
14. Yazdegerd I: 399 - 420
15. Shapur IV: 420
16. Khosrow: 420
17. Bahram V: 420 - TBA

 

[Richard Drummond]

Would it be better to have footnotes describing differences between OTL and TTL since there are times when divergences might not be so clear to the reader?

 

[Flavius Iulius Nepos]

Would it be better to have footnotes describing differences between OTL and TTL since there are times when divergences might not be so clear to the reader?

Well things have already started diverging enough (sack of Ravenna, Aetius’ fall and Attila’s death) that I don’t think it’s necessary. Maybe footnotes about why you chose to follow a certain path over an other (like Bleda more successful and lucky than Attila).

 

[Tarabas]

Agree with @Flavius Iulius Nepos . Although I admit I have been confused at the beginning, so maybe a recap with the POD(s) and some explanations on your choices (as suggested) would help.

 

[Richard Drummond]

Well things have already started diverging enough (sack of Ravenna, Aetius’ fall and Attila’s death) that I don’t think it’s necessary. Maybe footnotes about why you chose to follow a certain path over an other (like Bleda more successful and lucky than Attila).

Agree with @Flavius Iulius Nepos . Although I admit I have been confused at the beginning, so maybe a recap with the POD(s) and some explanations on your choices (as suggested) would help.

Thanks for the input. The next update will be a recap of the past chapters.

 

[Marc Anthony]

i love your TL how is the ERE doing?

 

[Richard Drummond]

i love your TL how is the ERE doing?

Thanks, great to see you enjoying it!

I'll be moving onto the Eastern Empire in the next chapter. They have interesting times ahead.

 

[Marc Anthony]

Thanks, great to see you enjoying it!

I'll be moving onto the Eastern Empire in the next chapter. They have interesting times ahead.

when will you post it

 

[Richard Drummond]

when will you post it

In a few days. I plan to first post an interlude talking about divergences from OTL.

 

[The Professor]

Can I request footnotes on particular choices for future languages ("Theedlijk Gyngthitzheidthing Vrangonrijk" for example just looks like you've mashed English and High German onto Dutch which would be silly). In spoilers if necessary.

 

[Richard Drummond]

Can I request footnotes on particular choices for future languages ("Theedlijk Gyngthitzheidthing Vrangonrijk" for example just looks like you've mashed English and High German onto Dutch which would be silly). In spoilers if necessary.

Definitely. I have a friend helping with the linguistic aspects of the TL but as time passes, I'll see if he could make posts about the changes since I frankly have no skill at linguistics whatsoever.

 

[Richard Drummond]

Augustine of Hippo is my favourite Christian saint and for some reason, I decided that this TL would have something to do with him since he is such an instrumental person in Christian and Western thought. ITTL, he survives longer than OTL recovering from his sickness but only long enough so that he died after the Vandals had taken the city. St. Augustine is the origin of the butterflies which would lead to the developing world. Things remained relatively the same for a bit though different people stood at different locations and people said different things and thought different things. The first bit was important because Marcian is killed in battle in North Africa. OTL, legend claims he was captured by the Vandals but released due to an image of him becoming emperor in the future. ITTL, no such thing happens. He stood somewhere different and some Vandal soldier stood somewhere different and OTL's emperor lay dead on the battlefield. This would be the first major butterfly and will change things up in the Eastern Empire drastically.

The next major change happens in Italy. Bonifatius returns to battle Aetius and is victorious like OTL but he isn't wounded and therefore is able to chase off the wily Aetius who fled to his Hunnic friends bringing with him some major butterflies that eventually led to the rise of Attila being halted. My interpretation of the rise of Attila was that Bleda made a move to get rid of his younger brother but was unsuccessful. ITTL, he is successful and differs from OTL Attila in that he is less ambitious than Attila. Attila took the immense risk of overextending himself and raiding into Gaul but Bleda is more reserved. I imagine he has a much better sense of humour than his brother based on his Berber dwarf whom he found a wife but if I am correct about him having attempted to kill off Attila first, it shows he is no less capable of violence. It is for this reason he invades Italy with Honoria being Honoria and Placidia being unable to calm Valentinian III down. ITTL, he has his sister killed, unlike OTL. Bleda was successful in his invasion of Italy unlike Attila in Gaul and Ravenna ends up being sacked allowing Bleda to return to live out the rest of his life ruling over a relatively stable regime.

And so that's a quick explanation of changes from OTL in CoTA. From now on, footnotes will appear discussing changes that might be missed. This was a very quick update but the next chapter shall be dealing with the life and death of Theodosius II.