DBWI: A Frankwank

There was a time - sometime in the sixth century - when it looked like everything was moving in the direction of the Franks. Their kingdom was one of the strongest in Europa and had overcome the Roman remnant at Noviodunum to get there. It sure looked like the Continent was ripe for a long period of Frankish dominion. And yet, today the Franks are a footnote in the history books.

Why didn't the Franks stick? And what has to be done to get a lasting Frankish dominion? How far can we get if we try to wank the Franks, in other words?
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Well, you can nerf the Justinian Reconquest. You know, soon after Belisarius subdued Italy at minimal costs, he turned his attention towards the Frank and captured Southern France.

The rump Northern Frank kingdom survived until the 14th century, when it was conquered and turned into a part of England.
 
Well, you can nerf the Justinian Reconquest. You know, soon after Belisarius subdued Italy at minimal costs, he turned his attention towards the Frank and captured Southern France.

The rump Northern Frank kingdom survived until the 14th century, when it was conquered and turned into a part of England.

How would they have held onto Aquitaine, though? Considering how quickly it broke free from the Romans and rose to power afterwards I don’t see how the Franks could have kept it in line.
 
Yeah, the Romans just did a number on them, as they went about making the Med a Roman lake once again.

The Franks were good, but they were never "Beat the return of the Roman Empire good". Nobody was, or would be for centuries.

Plus, there was thier stupid inheritance laws, where the realm gets divided between the sons. Meaning when Belisarius killed the Frankish king, they swpnt the next few decades fighting over what was left.
 
nerf the Justinian Reconquest
The Empire was bound to reconquer it's former core territories sooner or later. It's the same as Tzinista in the east, Mare Nostrum's bound to remain united in the long term.
As for England, they barely managed to integrate Franks before the invasions from the east almost broke them. Give Franks some 50-70 years and they'd hold for another couple of centures.
Maybe allience with Brittania could have helped, since they were opposed to Engles before Clovis VI managed to piss them off.
 
The Empire was bound to reconquer it's former core territories sooner or later. It's the same as Tzinista in the east, Mare Nostrum's bound to remain united in the long term.
If mainly linguistically; Aquitaine did break off pretty fast, and the Empire could never really hold Septimania. Still, the Mare Nostrum's still a Latin lake, at least in the north.

But then, the northern part of Europe often does seem to be the most backward part of the Continent, doesn't it? I could see a successful Frankish kingdom leading to a broader wank of Germanic peoples, as opposed to their being something of an afterthought as they are today.

I kind of suspect that Clovis I's lifelong embrace of Arianism was a factor in how badly the Franks got whomped, to be honest. The barbarian-descended peoples always seemed to stick with Arianism; the ones who converted to Nicene Christianity did a lot better off, largely through alliances with Constantinople. Even today, they follow heterodox forms of Christianity in the north, though they're at least slightly consistent with Chalcedonian Christology now, unlike those in the southern Mediterranean.
 
If mainly linguistically; Aquitaine did break off pretty fast, and the Empire could never really hold Septimania. Still, the Mare Nostrum's still a Latin lake, at least in the north.

And it was all thanks to Belisarius. If there was ever an argument for the Great Man Theory, it’s him; he basically singlehandedly restored the Roman political and cultural sphere of influence in the West. Even Aquitaine called itself a vassal of Rome for a few centuries after its de facto independence.

As for North Africa, I’d argue that Maghrebite/Amazigite culture was significantly influenced by Rome as well, at least early on.

But then, the northern part of Europe often does seem to be the most backward part of the Continent, doesn't it? I could see a successful Frankish kingdom leading to a broader wank of Germanic peoples, as opposed to their being something of an afterthought as they are today.

The issue is that European trade, culture, and society in general has always been centered around the Mare Nostrum. The Germans were always sort of peripheral; I’m not sure how the Franks could change that unless they held Aquitaine.
 
If mainly linguistically; Aquitaine did break off pretty fast, and the Empire could never really hold Septimania. Still, the Mare Nostrum's still a Latin lake, at least in the north.

But then, the northern part of Europe often does seem to be the most backward part of the Continent, doesn't it? I could see a successful Frankish kingdom leading to a broader wank of Germanic peoples, as opposed to their being something of an afterthought as they are today.

The most backwards part of the continent!? Germany is one of the greatest centers of industry in the world, and the English and United Kingdom of Scandinavia both had overseas empires that spanned the globe and more the rivals the Rhoman Empire in global influence for centuries. That type of revisionists propaganda may be all the rage within Rhome these days, but out here in the real world, you'll get shut down pretty quick for spouting that crap.

Anyway, the Lombard invasion of Aquitaine and Setimania did show that Rhoman influence over Gaul was pretty limited, even after the 'reconquest.' Justinian's entire policy after the blood letting his troops went through in Italy was to march an army in, get the loyalty of the local officials, and then march out again. If he hadn't gotten lucky at the Battle of Tours when the Franks' armies did pretty much everything in their power to actively lose, I doubt the Franks would have been pushed out of Gaul. Killing the King set off a four way civil war for the crown that Justinian was able to exploit. But, despite that, Rhoman influence once the army left was limited; hence why they invited the Lombards into the region to rule as their puppets (not that THAT went well, in the long run).

Anyway, getting back to point; I think the Franks might have had a real chance. Lets say that convert to the Orthodox faith; its going to mean that, in the long run, they will probably lose their ethnic identity (at least outside of the OTL Frankland Kingdom in the British Empire [OTL: Neatherlands and Belgium]) but in the short term its going to mean that they have much closer relations with the remains of the Roman aristocracy and Church official in Gaul (which were pretty much the same thing, by this point). With that, they could definitely solidify their rule and become a more centralized state.
 
Maghrebite
Are you from Arabia? Virtually nobody calls Amazig as Magreb anywhere else. The berbers control most of it territory, true, but the coast remains stubbornly latin, not to mention still Rhoman Septum or Exarchatus Africae with the jewel that is Carthago.
Germany is one of the greatest centers of industry in the world, and the English and United Kingdom of Scandinavia both had overseas empires that spanned the globe
Emphasis on had. And while Germany may still cling to its inefficient industry the modern world has already stepped into the next epoch. Who cares how much steel you can produce while poisoning your own nature and how big's your army if it can be destroyed in 10 minutes tops anyway?
While Rhome is still stending as firm as it ever has.
 
Are you from Arabia? Virtually nobody calls Amazig as Magreb anywhere else. The berbers control most of it territory, true, but the coast remains stubbornly latin, not to mention still Rhoman Septum or Exarchatus Africae with the jewel that is Carthago.

I dunno, I read a book by this Ghassanid scholar recently that kept calling the area the Maghreb, he was very insistent on Arabic names for some reason.

Anyway, I thought the Carthaginians were on a big independence kick at the moment? Or is that more overblown media crap?

Emphasis on had. And while Germany may still cling to its inefficient industry the modern world has already stepped into the next epoch. Who cares how much steel you can produce while poisoning your own nature and how big's your army if it can be destroyed in 10 minutes tops anyway?
While Rhome is still stending as firm as it ever has.

Moreover, I think it’s a massive stretch to say that the Scandinavian Empire ever competed with Rhome in any way. It was a decent regional power for a bit, but its failures in Ingria (OOC: OTL far Western Russia) ensured it would never be a global player.
 
Anyway, I thought the Carthaginians were on a big independence kick at the moment? Or is that more overblown media crap?
The referendum on independence will be held in several months. The Empress urged caution, but she'll be their head of state even if the referendum will succeed.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Emphasis on had. And while Germany may still cling to its inefficient industry the modern world has already stepped into the next epoch. Who cares how much steel you can produce while poisoning your own nature and how big's your army if it can be destroyed in 10 minutes tops anyway?
Oh man, are you espousing imaginary facts?? It is the fact that the Rhoman Empire ceased to exist as an Empire since 1918. Its decline began during the Arab, Bulgars, Turks, Norman and Mongols invasions, which led to the losses of North Africa, Egypt, Syria, Eastern Anatolia, most of Balkan and Southern Italy. Meanwhile, Northern Italian cities formed the Northern Italian League led by Venice and declared independence. The League wrecked the Byzantine navy near Greece in 1203 and then sacked Constantinople in 1204. Things got worse as time passed, and by the late 16th century we see "Roman" troops with short bows fighting against European cannons and muskets during the Roman-North Italian War, which resulted in unequal treaties forced upon the Empire.

Between the 16th and 18th centuries, they actually reformed and made gains in Asia, but remain defensive in Europe. The key event that made Rhomania cease to be even a regional power was in 1820, when the Emperor refused Britain's demand to abolish slave trade. The result: Roman navy destroyed without a single surviving ship, and Constantinople was bombarded into a ruin. They also lost Crete.

After that, the Empire was just a laughable stock consisting of Greece and Western Anatolia, and by the mid-19th century was merely a pawn in the Great Game between United Kingdom and Russia and eventually became the latter's puppet. The rise of nationalism sealed their fate. Following the Great War, the last Emperor was overthrown by a Greek liberal-nationalist revolution led by Venizelos in 1918. Greece then, well, they performed well, and took back Western Anatolia and even gained Carthage.

But then, the northern part of Europe often does seem to be the most backward part of the Continent, doesn't it? I could see a successful Frankish kingdom leading to a broader wank of Germanic peoples, as opposed to their being something of an afterthought as they are today.
Until 14th century only. The United Kingdom and the Hanseatic League in North Germany (together with North Italy in the South) forged ahead during the 1400s-1500s with much greater progress in labour-saving tools, metallurgy, weaponry, trading and shipbuilding. Their regimes were more liberal and thus more conductive to scientific research and knowledge acquisition. The heart of science and tech had permanently shifted to Northwestern Europe and later North America. And this lead was never reversed.

Britain and North American were also the birthplaces of liberalism. Today it is a stable and thriving democracy led by the Liberal Party.

The Empress urged caution, but she'll be their head of state even if the referendum will succeed.
You mean the crazed, delusional newly-crowned Queen of Greece who has just declared herself Empress of Rhomania. Fortunately, the Greek Assembly forced her to abdicate and sent her to an asylum.

Anyway, I thought the Carthaginians were on a big independence kick at the moment? Or is that more overblown media crap?
They were demanding independent from Kingdom of Greece, not the Empire of Rhomania that ceased to exist as a sovereign state recognized by the international community since 1918.

Moreover, I think it’s a massive stretch to say that the Scandinavian Empire ever competed with Rhome in any way. It was a decent regional power for a bit, but its failures in Ingria (OOC: OTL far Western Russia) ensured it would never be a global player.
This led to the rise of Russia as a superpower, which then turned Rhomania into a puppet state.
 
Oh man, are you espousing imaginary facts?? It is the fact that the Rhoman Empire ceased to exist as an Empire since 1918. Its decline began during the Arab, Bulgars, Turks, Norman and Mongols invasions, which led to the losses of North Africa, Egypt, Syria, Eastern Anatolia, most of Balkan and Southern Italy. Meanwhile, Northern Italian cities formed the Northern Italian League led by Venice and declared independence. The League wrecked the Byzantine navy near Greece in 1203 and then sacked Constantinople in 1204. Things got worse as time passed, and by the late 16th century we see "Roman" troops with short bows fighting against European cannons and muskets during the Roman-North Italian War, which resulted in unequal treaties forced upon the Empire.

Between the 16th and 18th centuries, they actually reformed and made gains in Asia, but remain defensive in Europe. The key event that made Rhomania cease to be even a regional power was in 1820, when the Emperor refused Britain's demand to abolish slave trade. The result: Roman navy destroyed without a single surviving ship, and Constantinople was bombarded into a ruin. They also lost Crete.

After that, the Empire was just a laughable stock consisting of Greece and Western Anatolia, and by the mid-19th century was merely a pawn in the Great Game between United Kingdom and Russia and eventually became the latter's puppet. The rise of nationalism sealed their fate. Following the Great War, the last Emperor was overthrown by a Greek liberal-nationalist revolution led by Venizelos in 1918. Greece then, well, they performed well, and took back Western Anatolia and even gained Carthage.

Until 14th century only. The United Kingdom and the Hanseatic League in North Germany (together with North Italy in the South) forged ahead during the 1400s-1500s with much greater progress in labour-saving tools, metallurgy, weaponry, trading and shipbuilding. Their regimes were more liberal and thus more conductive to scientific research and knowledge acquisition. The heart of science and tech had permanently shifted to Northwestern Europe and later North America. And this lead was never reversed.

Britain and North American were also the birthplaces of liberalism. Today it is a stable and thriving democracy led by the Liberal Party.

You mean the crazed, delusional newly-crowned Queen of Greece who has just declared herself Empress of Rhomania. Fortunately, the Greek Assembly forced her to abdicate and sent her to an asylum.

They were demanding independent from Kingdom of Greece, not the Empire of Rhomania that ceased to exist as a sovereign state recognized by the international community since 1918.

This led to the rise of Russia as a superpower, which then turned Rhomania into a puppet state.
OOC: Many butterflies died to bring us this DBWI.

The most backwards part of the continent!? Germany is one of the greatest centers of industry in the world, and the English and United Kingdom of Scandinavia both had overseas empires that spanned the globe and more the rivals the Rhoman Empire in global influence for centuries. That type of revisionists propaganda may be all the rage within Rhome these days, but out here in the real world, you'll get shut down pretty quick for spouting that crap.

Anyway, the Lombard invasion of Aquitaine and Setimania did show that Rhoman influence over Gaul was pretty limited, even after the 'reconquest.' Justinian's entire policy after the blood letting his troops went through in Italy was to march an army in, get the loyalty of the local officials, and then march out again. If he hadn't gotten lucky at the Battle of Tours when the Franks' armies did pretty much everything in their power to actively lose, I doubt the Franks would have been pushed out of Gaul. Killing the King set off a four way civil war for the crown that Justinian was able to exploit. But, despite that, Rhoman influence once the army left was limited; hence why they invited the Lombards into the region to rule as their puppets (not that THAT went well, in the long run).

Anyway, getting back to point; I think the Franks might have had a real chance. Lets say that convert to the Orthodox faith; its going to mean that, in the long run, they will probably lose their ethnic identity (at least outside of the OTL Frankland Kingdom in the British Empire [OTL: Neatherlands and Belgium]) but in the short term its going to mean that they have much closer relations with the remains of the Roman aristocracy and Church official in Gaul (which were pretty much the same thing, by this point). With that, they could definitely solidify their rule and become a more centralized state.
No need to get personal. The economic and quality-of-life stats are hard to argue with.

I'm not sure I'd consider the UKS the world-spanning empire you position it as, considering that it's a construct of later historians. Yeah, there were a lot of Suionic peoples in the eighth and ninth centuries who got on boats and carved out principalities for themselves in the mainland, and to this day you can find Suionic influences on the Angles as well as the Anglo-Franks, Germans and Hibernians. But these weren't conquests of a united empire; they were part of the Suionic Migration Period and undertaken mostly independently.

Now, wanking the High Kingdom of Scania of the 10th century might be really cool, considering it's the basis for what historians call the UKS; there was a time when it was the most powerful force in the North Sea, holding sway over the north as well as Germania and even parts of England. Hrolfr I of Scania was fortunate to have only one son to pass all his crowns to. Maybe if Hrolfr II had continued the practice of sole inheritance, the crowns could've stayed together, but instead his sons took to bickering over slices of the kingdom.

Or I guess if Hrolfr II hadn't been killed in Ingria, that would've helped.

The Britannic Empire was genuinely impressive, though, particularly in their being the first to cross the ocean and their being relatively successful at duplicating Roman imperial tradition.
 
Last edited:
Colonial history would be interesting if the Franks were able to establish a position in Europe that they felt like they could colonize the new world. Without a more southern Competitor Hispaniola was able to secure some of the most lucrative trade routes both round Africa and India, and a settlement system in Ameriga that stretched from the Mississippi river to the bottom of the Andes. Creating one of the few contenders of empire in the world for a short 300 years.
But back on colonial history maybe a Frankish state would be more suited to grab the sugar islands, and the Aztlan peoples depriving Hispaniola of much of it's wealth from the era. And if that goes then What would be Gran Ameriga wouldn't have a region to act as a heave and natural center so the independence wars from Hispaniola wouldn't have consolidated in one federated state, but in a bunch of break away republics
 
Colonial history would be interesting if the Franks were able to establish a position in Europe that they felt like they could colonize the new world. Without a more southern Competitor Hispaniola was able to secure some of the most lucrative trade routes both round Africa and India, and a settlement system in Ameriga that stretched from the Mississippi river to the bottom of the Andes. Creating one of the few contenders of empire in the world for a short 300 years.
But back on colonial history maybe a Frankish state would be more suited to grab the sugar islands, and the Aztlan peoples depriving Hispaniola of much of it's wealth from the era. And if that goes then What would be Gran Ameriga wouldn't have a region to act as a heave and natural center so the independence wars from Hispaniola wouldn't have consolidated in one federated state, but in a bunch of break away republics
Gaul is honestly pretty well-positioned to be an Atlantic-dominating country. If they held on, and if the Suionic Migration Period still occurred in some form, I could see Suiones settling in the north of the Frankish Kingdom and assimilating into sort of a Suiono-Frankish subgroup that injects Suionic maritime and adventurer tradition into their culture like it did with the Angles. The Suiones may not have been very unified, but they were incredibly adventurous. The Franks were already pretty adventurous in their own right, and they were beginning to adopt some Roman traditions from the war in Noviodunum. Hell, Clovis even codified Roman law and combined it with Frankish tradition. Now add a seafaring tradition to that, on top of a couple more centuries of continuing to digest Roman law. A Romano-Suionic-Frankish hybrid culture?

If nothing else, I could see synergies between a surviving Romano-Frankish Kingdom and a Suionic cultural component which could potentially result in Frank-derived culture spreading pretty far within Europa. Of course, by that point they'd probably start sounding more like Romance-speakers.
 
Gaul is honestly pretty well-positioned to be an Atlantic-dominating country. If they held on, and if the Suionic Migration Period still occurred in some form, I could see Suiones settling in the north of the Frankish Kingdom and assimilating into sort of a Suiono-Frankish subgroup that injects Suionic maritime and adventurer tradition into their culture like it did with the Angles. The Suiones may not have been very unified, but they were incredibly adventurous. The Franks were already pretty adventurous in their own right, and they were beginning to adopt some Roman traditions from the war in Noviodunum. Hell, Clovis even codified Roman law and combined it with Frankish tradition. Now add a seafaring tradition to that, on top of a couple more centuries of continuing to digest Roman law. A Romano-Suionic-Frankish hybrid culture?

If nothing else, I could see synergies between a surviving Romano-Frankish Kingdom and a Suionic cultural component which could potentially result in Frank-derived culture spreading pretty far within Europa. Of course, by that point they'd probably start sounding more like Romance-speakers.
They would be different enough that the Romans would disown them. But I hadn't considered the spreading of Frankish culture in Europe themselves. Let's assume that a Frankish kingdom is set up using Clovis' conquests Plus or minus some periphery. How would they play with the other states? They seem like natural allies for the angles giving each other breathing room to consolidate, and they would have a hell of a time going across the Pyrenees mountains, Italy is also boxed in. They really only have Germania to sack/pillage what ever but they already have a cultural link/dominance with them. Would Hispoliana keep a more Germanic behavior? The Latin-Amazig traditions are really strong in the area I can't see the area keeping any sort of Visogoth influence even with Frankish neighbors
 
Oh man, are you espousing imaginary facts?? It is the fact that the Rhoman Empire ceased to exist as an Empire since 1918.

I’m gonna stop you right there. First of all, Rhome has never ceased to exist. 1918 was a revolution that saw practical power shift to a democratic government, with the Emperor becoming a figurehead. It is still the same Rhoman Empire of Constantine the Great.

Its decline began during the Arab, Bulgars, Turks, Norman and Mongols invasions, which led to the losses of North Africa, Egypt, Syria, Eastern Anatolia, most of Balkan and Southern Italy.

This is an oversimplification of a long, long period of highs and lows for the Empire. The Arab invasion saw the establishment of foederati kingdoms in Egypt and Syria—and the native bureaucracies and cultures of the region eventually assimilated the Arabs into their diversity. The same period saw the South Slavs do the same in the Balkans, although they eventually assimilated into Rhome proper.

I’ll give you the Bulgars, they were a real pain in the rear for Leo VI and his successors. However, after the Battle of Philippopolis their empire gradually lost cohesion and the regions south of the Danube were reincorporated to the Empire (if only loosely) under Constantine V. Modern Bulgaria coalesced later, in the fourteenth century, separate from any Roman territory.

The rise of the Khazar Qaghanate (and then Shahdom) was a much bigger event than just “some Turks invaded the Rhomans.” Their lightning conquest of the Caucasus and raids into Anatolia were diverted by Constantine III agreeing to pay tribute, which is when the Khan turned towards Persia as an easier target, and the rest is history. The Khazars were demographically fated to rise (OOC: lol); that they did so into Persia instead of Rhome was due to superior Rhoman military strength.

The Normans? You’re referring to the Varangian Rebellions, I assume? Those were much more internal politics and crises than any external threat. They weakened the Empire considerably because imperial authority was the Varangians’ to be given in that era. However, that was just the state of affairs in medieval Rhome—the Rebellions were just an exceptionally low point, sparked by the arrival of Scanian mercenaries in Constantinople to support Michael Doukas’ Imperial claim.

Rhome wasn’t even directly involved in the Mongol Wars. When the Mongols took Khorasan, the Khazar Shah sent emissaries to Rhome asking for aid. Leo Monomachos, as the second son of the Strategos of Koloneia, jumped at the chance for glory and used his connections at court to amass an army. His army marched across Persia and was summarily crushed at Nishapur. He himself only barely survived the battle but somehow managed to reorganize the remains of his forces, who united with the main Persian army a few weeks later in time for their defeat at Teheran, where it is assumed the Rhoman forces were destroyed.

Meanwhile, Northern Italian cities formed the Northern Italian League led by Venice and declared independence. The League wrecked the Byzantine navy near Greece in 1203 and then sacked Constantinople in 1204. Things got worse as time passed, and by the late 16th century we see "Roman" troops with short bows fighting against European cannons and muskets during the Roman-North Italian War, which resulted in unequal treaties forced upon the Empire.

The Northern Italian League was only formed after the independent Despotate of Italy’s collapse in the eleventh century; the League never declared independence from Rhome.

You’re characterizing the 1203-4 conflict as some sort of major turning point as opposed to simply another civil war that the Italians stuck their noses into as per usual. The Battle of Chios was a major loss, true, but the Rhoman navy was never all that impressive to begin with and this was only Basileos Doukas’ half of it (the other half was in the future Emperor Giorgios V’s hands, the claimant the Italians were supporting). The 1204 “sack” wasn’t any worse than the regular chariot riots of the time period really; the area that was really destroyed was the Armenian Quarter since Doukas’ support came from that part of the Empire.

Also, “Byzantine”? Really? Slurs don’t really help your case, here.

Moving on, Rhome didn’t actually lose that much territory during their post-Varangian decline. Also, the story about Rhoman crossbows against Italian gunpowder is one isolated incident exaggerated beyond disbelief. During the First Neapolitan War, a rural, outdated Anatolian regiment was ambushed and annihilated by the Tuscan Duke’s personal force fitted with the latest Iberian musketry. This was used by Italian propaganda for decades afterward and created a stereotype of Rhoman backwardness that persists to this day.

Gunpowder came from Sina, from where it passed through Central Asia, Persia, and lastly Rhome to reach the rest of Europe. Of course Rhome had gunpowder tech on par with the Europeans who got it later. During the aforementioned war, the Varangian and Constantinopolitan regiments had cannon and muskets almost as good as the Tuscans, for instance.

Between the 16th and 18th centuries, they actually reformed and made gains in Asia

That’s an understatement. The Absolutist period of Rhome saw it rise to staggering heights. Leo the Great took Palestine—the day of the fall of Jerusalem is celebrated to this day in the Empire—and Armenia, and Ioannis continued his father’s work, sending forces as far as Tabriz.

, but remain defensive in Europe.

Yes and no. They did lose Dalmatia in this period, proving the weakness of the Rhoman navy, to Venetia. However, this was also aided by Dalmatian compliance, since they had more in common with the Italiot Venetian nobility than the (at the time) Anatolian imperial nobility.

Also, they certainly held the line in Magna Graecia despite multiple Italian attempts to size Neapolis.

The key event that made Rhomania cease to be even a regional power was in 1820, when the Emperor refused Britain's demand to abolish slave trade. The result: Roman navy destroyed without a single surviving ship, and Constantinople was bombarded into a ruin. They also lost Crete.

How, exactly, did the destruction of Rhoman naval power and influence destroy their Asian empire, based entirely on land power? It was a disaster for the Empire, of course, with both Magna Graecia and Rhoman Africa separated from the Empire for the first time in over a millennium, but it didn’t weaken their position in Asia all that much.

Also, it wasn’t the metropolis of Constantinople that was destroyed, it was the military fortifications of the city on both sides of the Marmara.

After that, the Empire was just a laughable stock consisting of Greece and Western Anatolia,

Calling Rhoman Europe “Greece” IMO diminishes the integral regions of Arberia, Sclavenia (OOC: Serbia), and Moesia. These regions have Greek-speaking elite and in some cases Greek majorities, but even the non-ethnically Greek populations were loyal in this period and still are today.

Nominally Rhome still controlled almost all of Anatolia, Syria, and Palestine in the 19th century. Their real influence over these areas was much weaker, true, but that was because of the strength of the Despotates of Armenia and Syria.

and by the mid-19th century was merely a pawn in the Great Game between United Kingdom and Russia and eventually became the latter's puppet.

You’re conflating dynastic and national influence. It was the Rurikids that dominated Rhome through their chokehold on the Imperial title, not the Russian Grand Dukes. They were terribly detrimental to the Rhoman state and arguably caused their 19th century nadir: they propped up the Russian states by donating to their relatives (emptying the Rhoman treasury along the way), allowed Armenia and Syria to gain influence at home and abroad, and spent Rhoman lives like coppers on German soil in useless attempts to stop the rise of English hegemony.

The rise of nationalism sealed their fate.

You mean in sparking the movement to reunify the Empire in Africa and Magna Graecia? You’re right.

Following the Great War, the last Emperor was overthrown by a Greek liberal-nationalist revolution led by Venizelos in 1918. Greece then, well, they performed well, and took back Western Anatolia and even gained Carthage.

Again, it never stopped being the Rhoman Empire. The last Rurikid Emperor was kicked out (thank goodness) and the next closest descendant of Ioannis IX took the throne with greatly reduced powers. Then Enosis was carried out with Sicily, Africa, and Crete, thanks to the eradication of British influence in the Mare Nostrum after the War.


Until 14th century only. The United Kingdom and the Hanseatic League in North Germany (together with North Italy in the South) forged ahead during the 1400s-1500s with much greater progress in labour-saving tools, metallurgy, weaponry, trading and shipbuilding. Their regimes were more liberal and thus more conductive to scientific research and knowledge acquisition. The heart of science and tech had permanently shifted to Northwestern Europe and later North America. And this lead was never reversed.

This is a bunch of liberalist rhetoric. The heart of science and tech, worldwide, has always been Asia; some doodads and fancy ships don’t change that. Sina and Persia were experimenting with vacuums and steam power at the same time as the oh so advanced Germans were just beginning to hear about heliocentrism. The competition between minor European powers fostered military technology development, which was important eventually, but theoretical science was never the German or English forte.

Britain and North American were also the birthplaces of liberalism. Today it is a stable and thriving democracy led by the Liberal Party.

Yes, and magic liberalism helped Britain so much when it got its crap kicked in during the Great War.


You mean the crazed, delusional newly-crowned Queen of Greece who has just declared herself Empress of Rhomania. Fortunately, the Greek Assembly forced her to abdicate and sent her to an asylum.

.....ohhhhhh, you must be Russian! That’s why you’re so anti-Rhoman! Are you still butthurt about the Rurikids, then, claiming they’re the rightful Emperors?

The mentally challenged lady is the current Empress’ sister, just FYI.


They were demanding independent from Kingdom of Greece, not the Empire of Rhomania that ceased to exist as a sovereign state recognized by the international community since 1918.

No, the Kingdom of Greece is a Russian propaganda name for the modern constitutional Empire. The Empire of Rhomania is acknowledged by the international community, just not by the Organization of Russian States.

(OOC: Assume I’m a bit of a Rhoman nationalist ITTL, so some of this response could be exaggeration. For instance, Rhome really does have a worse quality of life and has been technologically backwards for quite some time)

OOC: Many butterflies died to bring us this DBWI.

OOC: I tried to fix this a bit.
 
Top