[DBWI: Could the East Roman “Trojan” Empire have survived into 2nd millennium?

the ERE could have lasted through 1000 “anno domini”

  • Yes

    Votes: 18 75.0%
  • No

    Votes: 6 25.0%

  • Total voters
    24

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
The Eastern Roman Empire effectively outlived the Western Roman by about 215 years, until the successful Umayyad siege, infiltration and storming of its capital of Nova Troia in 690 according to the Christian calendar.

However even though Roman imperial history from the third Christian century appeared to be a procession of “one damn thing after the other” in its final centuries the East Roman Empire showed surprising vitality, managing to reconquer much of the Mediterranean west under Justinian in the 560s.

It makes me wonder if the East Romans could have held off the Arab invaders, who fragmented and lost their vitality only about two centuries later.

To the skeptical I would say the East Romans staged big comebacks before, recovering Italy for a generation and Africa for two, and coming back a while later from the Avar ravaging of the Balkans and the Sassanid ravaging of Asia Minor and Levant and siege of Nova Troia.

If the ERE can hold on till the Abbasid decay in Asia Minor and in Greece could they not be “home free” for a few more centuries even into the 2nd Christian millennium?

What could the knock a.on consequences be for Europe in particular?

With an ERE instead of the Abbasid Anatolian province of al-Turayah, and the Umayyad holdover state of Bizantiyah in southern Thrace and Greece, might Christian missionary work prosper more than Muslim?

With the East Romans holding the straits and their trade routes I would think the Bulgarians, Serbs and Magyars would have become Christian instead of Muslim, and the Vlachs would have remained Christian. Perhaps we could have had a Christian “Varangian” princedom based in al-Qiyev instead of the “Caliphate of Rus” we all remember.

A Christian Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals?

A basically Greek speaking Eastern Roman Empire lasting up to half a millennium, perhaps being called the “Trojan” Empire even more than the “Roman”?

Your thoughts?
 
Last edited:
Well, we'd probably not have the "Ravennan Empire" formed by remnants of the Eastern Roman Empire's government and military in Italy along with members of the Imperial Family who fled to Italy and the Exarchate of Ravenna.
 
The Eastern Romans very nearly did survive. If you have the Persians attempt to rendezvous with the Romans before attacking the Arab Army beseiging Ctesiphon, they probably would have smashed the Arabs and both Empires could have survived.

A less ideal option is to have the ERE capital be on the other side of the Hellaspont(Byzantion seems logical). The Arabs wouldn't be able to take a well fortified city on across water, and would likely retreat from Anatolia entirely.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Well, we'd probably not have the "Ravennan Empire" formed by remnants of the Eastern Roman Empire's government and military in Italy along with members of the Imperial Family who fled to Italy and the Exarchate of Ravenna.

I'm a little bit spotty on my Italian history, do you you recall the basics of how the Ravennan Empire interacted with the Saracens, Lombards and Franks over the century or two or three [I cannot believe I'm blanking on this, yikes] after Ravenna's Exarch "took up the purple" in 690 AD?

The Eastern Romans very nearly did survive. If you have the Persians attempt to rendezvous with the Romans before attacking the Arab Army beseiging Ctesiphon, they probably would have smashed the Arabs and both Empires could have survived.

Interesting! Were there discussions about a rendezvous and it just didn't come to pass? You know actually I think an earlier PoD like this is far more plausible than the empire surviving after it lost its protective glacis in Syria.

A less ideal option is to have the ERE capital be on the other side of the Hellaspont(Byzantion seems logical). The Arabs wouldn't be able to take a well fortified city on across water, and would likely retreat from Anatolia entirely.

Are you sure about that? The Goths burned their way through Byzantion (and the rest of Thrace and Greece) in the late 4th century. An eastern imperial capital in Europe might not even survive to deal with the Arab wave, being taken down by the Avars if not the Lombards, Huns, Alans or Goths.

I guess on reflection, the Romans could have fortified a capital in Byzantion by taking advantage of its peninsular geography. But they would have needed to build and maintain the fortifications early and often to survive the Volkswanderung centuries. I mean, there's a chance it could be defendable from European as well as Asian invaders- it is not sitting out there so exposed like Adaranabul (I think the Romans called that "Adrianople").

But for my money in terms of its placement on strategic trade routes, land area and suitability to be fortified from attack, it would be hard to beat the Galiybaliy peninsula, if you are going to have a capital in Europe.

Now that I am thinking in terms of defensibility, to be honest, Chalcedon right opposite from Byzantion in Asia Minor is on a bit of a peninsula and would have been easier to defend than Nova Troia. Chalcedon was prominent until the end of the 4th century, there was a major church council there, but we hardly hear of it once Rome fell in 471, when Nova Troia was left as the only imperial capital, and it "sucked away all the oxygen" from once prominent northwest Anatolian cities like Nicaea (site of a major Church council) and Nicomedia, which was an eastern capital under Nicomedia.

In a sense though, isn't it all kind of academic?

The lure of building the new capital in the Troad (1) peninsula, atop the supposed site (2) of the old, pre-Roman home of Aeneas, Troy likely would have been impossible for any Emperor to resist.

When he founded Nova Troia in western Asian Minor, Constantine was paying homage to an honored and storied Roman tradition, and it made for a nice balance with his embrace of a brand new religious policy and ultimate deathbed conversion to Christianity.

1 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troad)

2 of course modern archaeology and scientific instruments of course found the remains of the ancient Troy of the Iliad about 20 kilometers away from where Constantine laid the foundation stone of Nova Troia
 
Last edited:
I'm a little bit spotty on my Italian history, do you you recall the basics of how the Ravennan Empire interacted with the Saracens, Lombards and Franks over the century or two or three [I cannot believe I'm blanking on this, yikes] after Ravenna's Exarch "took up the purple" in 690 AD?
Well, the Ravennan Empire (or the "Second Western Roman Empire", depending on who you talk to) has always fascinated me as they provided a basis for a unified Italy during the Middle Ages and has lasted until the present-day (even if it's control is limited to Italy, a few Meditteranean islands (Sicily, Sardinia, Corsica, and the Balearic Islands) and Provence)
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Anyway, your thoughts on the Empire of Gothland (OOC: Visigothic Spain survives ITTL)?

I cannot say with a lot of confidence, I'm not up on my Gothlandic/Gothian history as much as the history of Islamic Rusiyah and Eastern Europe.

It makes sense, simply by virtue of geography and ocean currents, that the state occupying the Iberian peninsula would be the first European state to establish the trade route around Africa to Asia, to ultimately conquer India and form the founder populations of Sudafrica, Australia and have a presence in Atlantia.

It is somewhat odd that Gothland's Empire never was dominant in the Atlantian continents, but until the sugar boom, far more money was to be made to the east.

And of course the sugar boom (and tobacco) is what eventually led to the competing efforts of the early modern Ravennan Empire in the Atlantic continents, along with Neustria's and Sexland's efforts.

Well, the Ravennan Empire (or the "Second Western Roman Empire", depending on who you talk to) has always fascinated me as they provided a basis for a unified Italy during the Middle Ages and has lasted until the present-day (even if it's control is limited to Italy, a few Meditteranean islands (Sicily, Sardinia, Corsica, and the Balearic Islands) and Provence)

Well yes that what the 2nd WRE is limited to, today, but only after a series of wars and the schism and secession of the exarchs and Senates of Panama and Cuba and Manhattan led to completely independent Latin/Italian-speaking republics.

Getting back to my specialty, Rusiyah, I was thinking about how the modern Rusiyan Sultanate, founded originally from the Emirate of Walad-e-mir, controlling from the Pripet Marshes to the northern Pacific, claimed continuity with the al-Qiyev Caliphate of the tenth century.

Well maybe even in a world where the ERE lasted longer, and spread Christianity to al-Qiyev, there could be a "Caesariate of Varangia*" or something parallel ruling from the Pripet to the Pacific. Thinking of their names if we extract the Arabic influence is tricky, but maybe the Varangian capital would have been called "Kiev" and power later would have transferred to "Vladimir" after the nomads devastated the old capital.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
OOC - if any of the alternate names are puzzling to you, either PM me or post-OOC in the thread to ask.
 
Interesting! Were there discussions about a rendezvous and it just didn't come to pass? You know actually I think an earlier PoD like this is far more plausible than the empire surviving after it lost its protective glacis in Syria.



Are you sure about that? The Goths burned their way through Byzantion (and the rest of Thrace and Greece) in the late 4th century. An eastern imperial capital in Europe might not even survive to deal with the Arab wave, being taken down by the Avars if not the Lombards, Huns, Alans or Goths.

I guess on reflection, the Romans could have fortified a capital in Byzantion by taking advantage of its peninsular geography. But they would have needed to build and maintain the fortifications early and often to survive the Volkswanderung centuries. I mean, there's a chance it could be defendable from European as well as Asian invaders- it is not sitting out there so exposed like Adaranabul (I think the Romans called that "Adrianople").

But for my money in terms of its placement on strategic trade routes, land area and suitability to be fortified from attack, it would be hard to beat the Galiybaliy peninsula, if you are going to have a capital in Europe.

Now that I am thinking in terms of defensibility, to be honest, Chalcedon right opposite from Byzantion in Asia Minor is on a bit of a peninsula and would have been easier to defend than Nova Troia. Chalcedon was prominent until the end of the 4th century, there was a major church council there, but we hardly hear of it once Rome fell in 471, when Nova Troia was left as the only imperial capital, and it "sucked away all the oxygen" from once prominent northwest Anatolian cities like Nicaea (site of a major Church council) and Nicomedia, which was an eastern capital under Nicomedia.

In a sense though, isn't it all kind of academic?

The lure of building the new capital in the Troad (1) peninsula, atop the supposed site (2) of the old, pre-Roman home of Aeneas, Troy likely would have been impossible for any Emperor to resist.

When he founded Nova Troia in western Asian Minor, Constantine was paying homage to an honored and storied Roman tradition, and it made for a nice balance with his embrace of a brand new religious policy and ultimate deathbed conversion to Christianity.

1 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troad)

2 of course modern archaeology and scientific instruments of course found the remains of the ancient Troy of the Iliad about 20 kilometers away from where Constantine laid the foundation stone of Nova Troia
After both Rome and Persia suffered defeats to the Arabs, they agreed to call a truce and work together. The Arabs were more ambitious then expected, and put Ctesiphon to seige. The Shahansha decided that he had to lift the seige on his own(he believed having Rome help him would be political suicide) and was crushed.

I agree, Constantine would have to be the one to develope Byzantion. I don't think Nova Troia was as important a location as you make it out to be though.

Side question, what would Constantine's city at Byzantion be called? Constantinopolis maybe?
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
After both Rome and Persia suffered defeats to the Arabs, they agreed to call a truce and work together. The Arabs were more ambitious then expected, and put Ctesiphon to seige. The Shahansha decided that he had to lift the seige on his own(he believed having Rome help him would be political suicide) and was crushed.

Oh wow - so a less prideful Persia could have significantly increased resistance to the Arabs, and cooperation between the historic empires was *not* seen as anathema in principle - interesting.

Side question, what would Constantine's city at Byzantion be called? Constantinopolis maybe?

Sounds about right to me. what would have been the alternative endings? If you went with something latin, didn't they pretty much adopt "polis" into their own vocabulary?
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Anyway, your thoughts on the Empire of Gothland (OOC: Visigothic Spain survives ITTL)?

Your query sparked me to get reacquainted with Gothlandic Iberian history-

I had forgotten how much of their national identity and military tradition was forged fighting off Frankish occupation.

What if the Franks (the West Franks/Neustrians who spoke the Romance Neustrian language, not the Teutonic speaking East Franks/Austrasians) succeeded in holding anywhere from half to all of the Iberian peninsula. That could be quite a state extending from Flanders or the Meuse down to the northern pillar of Hercules.

But also, imagine if the Exarchs of Ravenna had been less effective fighting off the Lombards. There were periods where the exarchs will limited to scattered coastal/urban holdings. Perhaps if the Italian peninsula had been more fragmented, the Frankish Kings would have made the Italian peninsula more their playground than the Iberian peninsula?
 
Oh wow - so a less prideful Persia could have significantly increased resistance to the Arabs, and cooperation between the historic empires was *not* seen as anathema in principle - interesting.

To be fair, Persia survived a long, long time after this, even if it never returned to its pre-invasion size. The question is why the Sassanids were able to regroup after their initial defeats to the Arabs while the Romans were completely conquered.
 
Oh, and I forgot Carthage and the surrounding area (OOC: OTL Tunisia+Northeastern Algeria) as areas ruled by the Second WRE to this day as well. To be fair, they're more or less independent nowadays outside of defense and foreign policy and sharing a monarch with the "core Empire".
 
Oh, and I forgot Carthage and the surrounding area (OOC: OTL Tunisia+Northeastern Algeria) as areas ruled by the Second WRE to this day as well. To be fair, they're more or less independent nowadays outside of defense and foreign policy and sharing a monarch with the "core Empire".
So.. Where is core empire?
 
Top