DBWI: Roman Empire partitioned

I read in my history class that back around the fourth century the Romans considered partitioning the empire into east and west. The emperor who wanted to do it died before he could, but his successor never carried it out.

So, how would a divided Rome look? Would it have more resources to devote to colonizing Terra Occidentalis? Would the Quirinian conquests be delayed?
 
Excuse me... didnt this happened OTL?
Roman Empire was in fact divided... A short lived de dacto split first happened between Octavian and Mark Antony... and then continued with Diocletian, Constantine I sons, Valentinian I and lastly with Theodosius I (this one was permanent)
 
Excuse me... didnt this happened OTL?
Roman Empire was in fact divided... A short lived de dacto split first happened between Octavian and Mark Antony... and then continued with Diocletian, Constantine I sons, Valentinian I and lastly with Theodosius I (this one was permanent)

Remember, we're talking about the fourth century. Octavian and Antony were first century, Diocletian was distinctly third century, Valentinus/Valentinian second, and Theodosius sixth.

Besides, by the fourth century the Holy Roman state was already divided on religious lines. Partitioning the state at this point in time would mean partitioning the church as well.

Notice the rise of the various rogue Prince-Bishops on the outskirts of the empire. Now imagine them running rampant through the entire holy roman empire. That would be the inevitable result of division within the state, following division within the church.

[OOC: My poor attempt to salvage the DBWI. Christianity and the Church spreads much faster and becomes much more powerful, so the cracks start showing sooner and in larger fashion.]
 

Deleted member 5719

Could we see an earlier separation of Prydein/Britania from the empire?

Lets say Dux Artorius Aurelianus (or someone the butterflies had fluttered in to a similarly strategic position) used the Romano-British forces to create an independent kingdom, rather than merely establish freedom of conscience for Pelasgians.

With a divided, and presumably weaker, empire it would have been entirely possible.
 
I seriously doubt that the Roman Empire could have survived , even if in name only till the Great Wars of the 16th Century . Partition is tantamount to further Imperial decentralisation , till the title Emperor became elective out of all of the Rex who de facto , and from the 9th Century onwards , De Jure controlled the provinces .

Ofcourse , we would'nt have such a stunningly large ( on paper) , and hyper decentralised Empire .

Splitting it into two would surely Doom the West - data and simulations indicate that it would'nt have survived on its' own without the East , at that point of time .
 
Top