DBWI: Siege of Constantinople fails

A key event in the final fall of the (Eastern) Rhoman Empire to the Persians was the siege and then sack of the Rhoman capitol, Constantinople, in the year 4 AH (or 626 AD) by the Avars, Slavs, and other barbarian groups.

But what if the siege had failed and the city had held out against the invading force? The Rhomans did hold out for several months after all; it is conceivable that the invaders could have lost patience, or that the emperor had sent even a small detachment of men from his army to even the odds, or any of a million other counterfactuals. What I want to know is: how would our modern world be different?
 
Re

The emperor was in Constantinople so he would not dispatch troops to Constantinople , all he had was there. the ERE was more or less down to 1 city, to save the empire one must Go much further back, gunpowder and time were no longer on their side
 
OOC: You seem to have missed the fact that this is a DBWI ("double-blind what if"), with a POD of 626 AD, the time of the *first* siege of Constantinople -- not 1453, the time of the last one. In 626, the emperor was *not* in Constantinople, and the empire, while down on its luck, was far from being down to one city. (Note the OP's use of the spelling "Rhoman" and the preference for Islamic dating (4 AH) to indicate that this discussion is supposed to take place in an alternate universe.)
 
Last edited:
Well, given that the ERE was virtually exhausted following the Siege of Constantinople, I can't possibly imagine what Heraclius could do to eject the Persian Empire from Anatolia... after all, his army wasn't that big, so surely he couldn't take the offensive to the Persians for fear of the Sassanid Army trapping his forces and destroying him.

Given that, I would expect an eventual peace where Heraclius accepts the loss of half the Empire... this would leave the Sassanid Empire in a much better position to resist the Islamic invasion (though of course whether the Christians in Anatolia would rise en masse against the Persians like they did in the Balkans OTL is another question), though perhaps Byzantium might use the opportunity to stab Persia in the back.
 
But that's the thing: at the time of the siege, he *was* in the midst of a deep invasion into Persian territory, including lands that had never been part of the Rhoman empire in any form. The only reason he pulled back is that he heard the siege was going poorly for his side (and indeed by the time the news reached him, the defenses had failed utterly). So what if a garrison of his men had been sent to the Rhoman capitol earlier on; isn't it possible that his plan could have succeeded, and that under such intense pressure, the Persians would agree to a restoration of traditional Rhoman lands, maybe even including Egypt and Jerusalem? Maybe not, but it's a thought. It was certainly a gamble on Heraclius's part, which in OTL he lost big time, what with the complete dissolution of the empire by 35 AH.
 
OOC: Are the 12,000 soldiers that were in Constantinople in there OTL, still in there ITTL?

IC: Well, the Rhoman navy was quite powerful. If they can defeat the Persian and Avar navy (and the Avar navy should be pretty easy to defeat on its own), then Constantinople can hold out indefinitely. Remember, it was only by deception and trickery that they made it past the walls in the first place. If they can't sneak in, then I don't see how they are going to take the Theodosian Walls by storm, especially if their navy was defeated.

As for what happens next...well Heraclius was in a great position to counterattack and was achieving success already. The Persian Empire might be exhausted at this point. I think you'll see a status quo peace at least, from the reign of Maurice. Both sides would be exhausted though. I wonder how the Rhomans would be able to recover the Balkans. OTL, the Persians were unable to achieve any success there and even lost Constantinople.

I also wonder how this effects Rhoman Italy. When word reached the Exarch of Ravenna Isaac, of the fall, he declared himself emperor and managed to get the crucial support of Carthage. His managing to hold on assured that a Roman "empire" if you could call it that lived on in Italy. Things might go a lot differently there as well if Constantinople falls.
 
OOC: Are the 12,000 soldiers that were in Constantinople in there OTL, still in there ITTL?

IC: Well, the Rhoman navy was quite powerful. If they can defeat the Persian and Avar navy (and the Avar navy should be pretty easy to defeat on its own), then Constantinople can hold out indefinitely. Remember, it was only by deception and trickery that they made it past the walls in the first place. If they can't sneak in, then I don't see how they are going to take the Theodosian Walls by storm, especially if their navy was defeated.

As for what happens next...well Heraclius was in a great position to counterattack and was achieving success already. The Persian Empire might be exhausted at this point. I think you'll see a status quo peace at least, from the reign of Maurice. Both sides would be exhausted though. I wonder how the Rhomans would be able to recover the Balkans. OTL, the Persians were unable to achieve any success there and even lost Constantinople.

I also wonder how this effects Rhoman Italy. When word reached the Exarch of Ravenna Isaac, of the fall, he declared himself emperor and managed to get the crucial support of Carthage. His managing to hold on assured that a Roman "empire" if you could call it that lived on in Italy. Things might go a lot differently there as well if Constantinople falls.

OOC: In terms of the number of soldiers there, it should be smaller ITTL. As I understand it, IOTL the emperor sent a garrison of men from his army in Persia back to the capitol, which when combined with what was already there, made up 12,000, right? Correct me if I'm wrong; I heard it on a history podcast. My idea for a POD was that ITTL, he neglects to do so, reasoning that the combination of the walls and the men already there will be enough to withstand the siege. I don't think our sources are clear on how many of the 12K were already there, but in any case, it's less than 12K. By the way, I like your secondary POD of a Trojan Horse-like move. It's probably necessary.

IC: You mean if Constantinople *doesn't* fall. :)

Presumably ITTL, Isaac doesn't make his move until maybe after the Arab conquests. By the way, do you think said conquests go differently than IOTL? And what does a surviving Rhoman empire (assuming it withstands the Arabs as well) mean for the later development of Europe?
 
OOC: I'll take your word for it.


IC: Hmm. Can the Arabs really go up against two empires at once? Even if they weaken one of them, the other can still take them on while they are weakened. Even an exhausted Byzantine Empire I think might be able to hold them. All it would take is one decisive victory, and that might be enough to stop the conquests in their tracks.
 
Well, with such a POD there is much that can change. For example, without the fall of Constantinople, I doubt the Bulgar invasion into the Heamusian Peninsula (*Balkans) would be as successful as it was, seing as how the fall basically meant that the Rhomanoi had to withdraw from the Danube Delta, leaving it wide open to the Bulgars under Asparukh.

Without a fall, I think the Romans could have easily withheld the Bulgar horde. Which automatically waves the Heamusian (*Balkan) Islamic tradition, as the Bulgars, mixing with the slavs and converting under Jia Boris I. The very rank of "Jia" that later became synonymous with the Slavic Islamic tradition probably wouldn't exist, nor would the Adulian script, on which Slavic written word is convayed, being based on Arabic and all. So there is that.

Another thing, the Orthodox Christian strongholds in Anatolia wouldn't exist as well, the Avars, Greeks and other people from the former Empire being condensed and bunched up the cities and kingdoms which are today the Christian centers in the east. I qustion whether the Pontic Republics or the Greek nation will even exist?

On the more larger scale, the whole prominance of the Islamic World in Southern Europe will most likely be thrown off, but that requires way too much speculation. :D
 
I wonder, would the Bulgars convert to Orthodox Christianity? That would be ironic, given the history of tension between Bulgarians and Christians that followed their conversion.
 
Top