Good idea. I might update and improve it in the future.Perhaps, you could threadmark it.
Good idea. I might update and improve it in the future.Perhaps, you could threadmark it.
That’s the plan, however the gothic reaction to their king’s death can be unpredictable and Hypatius is not the only player here.Its probably a good call on Hypatius' part, though it can easily blow up in his face. Hopefully he can control how news of Athalaric's death is spread. Ideally he could pit various gothic rivals against each other and then sweep in afterwards 'to restore order'
Thank you. I don’t know much about Game of thrones but since everyone seems to be unhappy with the way it ended I really hope to not disappoint in the end.Particularly liked the scheming twist in the end. In these dire times when even GoT gets disappointing, we sorely need well thought stories.
Yep! Unfortunately I wasn’t able to post this one earlier. Hopefully the next one will come on time.Yay new update
Glad you like it. At first I wasn’t completely sure about this part, but I would really like to shift part of the focus from the history of the empire to the lives of its protagonists. Currently we have a great number of them (both historical and fictitious) with their background and their relations with the other characters of the timeline so I think it would be interesting to “exploit” them more than I’m currently doing. Let me know what you all think about this.I am glad that Orestes got what he deserved. A traitor of the Empire dying by being betrayed as well.
But still his scions live... The episode of Valens and Serena may open towards the end of a feud, or deepening further into a web of love and blood through the ages... (ok, I admit, I liked that part very much. I am sure the late Imperial chroniclers would be delighted to add this story and fabricating tales and such about it. Romance and revenge are always the juice of legends and the Western Empire has its own right to have them)
I don’t want to reveal further detail about this war. What I can say is that, despite its importance, this is not going to be the most destructive conflict of the VI century.So, the Ostrogoths were both under pressure in the West as in the East. Is probable this may end both in tragedy (extermination) or in glory (indipendent Danubian kingdom) for them, or likely towards the most inevitable outcome (fall of the Royal households, submission to the Empires. No more foederati, but from now Roman subjects in name and right under an Emperor as their Rex Gothae).
That’s why I’m not sure about this. Hopefully I’ve enought time to think about it.Uhm I am not comfortable in discussing alternate derivations of Christianism so I'll pass. I won't mind if it would happen in a TL, of course.
If I remember correctly it was during Justinian’s reign that the Monophysite started regarding themselves as part of a completely different church opposed to the Roman one. The current emperor is a Monophysite so history could go differently.as there is no justinian the bishops will have a better live as he ruined the relations with the syriacs and copts
Definitely this timeline won’t see the rise of the Pope above the other bishop of the Church.I believe this would be really interesting. ITTL the papacy is not enjoying so much freedom as OTL, so, if the Empire gets to live long enough, we could see the Pope as really a "First among Equals".
Well occasionaly the emperors (I’m now thinking about Basil I) played one Patriarch against the other, so why not? A Calcedonian Patriarch could side with a Calcedonian usurper/western emperor against his Monophysite overlord.Of course, no Justinian means no Pentarchy, but maybe two Emperors could come up with this solution. I could even picture the Pope and the Patriarch of Constantinople played as bishops (a terrible chess joke) by two rival Emperors when relations between the two Empires get bad.
From what I’ve read Justinian was close to approaching the Monophysite position (or at least part of their thesis), thanks also to Theodora’s influence, until his wars in the West forced him to reconsider his ideology in an attempt to win over the Italian aristocracy, while his wife continued to carry out her attempts to force the Roman bishop to adopt her position. But here we have a Monophysite emperor ruling over a (probably) majority Monophysite empire. The still pagan population of inner Anatolia could be converted to Christianity by Monophysite (or alt-Monothelite) bishops in order to strengthen the “official” creed. But the situation could get really messy so I want to think more about this.Getting more into the details of the Council, we are pretty much in the era of the monothelistic quarrel. My feeling (not an expert, though) is that the need for this would come as OTL from the East, in an attempt to reconcile with the Monophysites (again, as it was OTL). The real question is, why/how could this Doctrine be incorporated into the Orthodoxy? Given OTL flat out refusal by the Pope, I think we would need a political reason for this. Like, say, the Emperor in the East can face rebellion in the Monophysite parts of the Empire, sees Monotelism as a solution (which was intended) and bribes/convince his Western colleague to comply. Although, as it has been pointed out, no Justinian really reduces this need.
I mever understood why the church, at least in the east, didn't take a miaphysite position (one compound nature thats both devine and Man)
Oh and just want to say that i find it amusing that alot of these positions tack on "without confusion", as if simply decaring it made it so
Mostly because the people of Constantinople (and the elite units billeted there) were majority Chalcedonian. That’s why none of Anastasius’ relatives were able to succede him. Conversely Justin, influenced by his nephew Justinian and later on Justinian himself, found more convenient to end the conflict with Rome in order to undermine the Gothic kingdom and ease the reintegration of the Italics. Their successors all came from the Chalcedonian part of the empire and although some of them were tolerant toward the Monophysites, few would embrace it when the risk to alienate the West, Constantinople included, loomed on them.I mever understood why the church, at least in the east, didn't take a miaphysite position (one compound nature thats both devine and Man)
Well the emperor is the Vicar of Christ on earth so he certainly knows better than us.Oh and just want to say that i find it amusing that alot of these positions tack on "without confusion", as if simply decaring it made it so
Well the emperor is the Vicar of Christ on earth so he certainly knows better than us.
In the future we could have even more emperors/vicars. Maybe external forces could try to usurp that title as well.Two Emperors, so two Vicars.
In the future we could have even more emperors/vicars. Maybe external forces could try to usurp that title as well.
Not exactly a stall, as the Romans only partially avenged the looting of their territory before being defeated by the Herulians at the beginning of the new year. Keep in mind that Rome is still busy in Africa. Also the two Gothic leaders may decide to join the forces against the empire. Finally let’s not forget about the myriad of barbarian tribes beyond the Danube awaiting their chance to meddle in the conflict. The next update may come at the end of this week as I've a bit of spare time now but I can't make promise. Otherwise it will be online in two weeks.Well, all things considered Illyricum went better than expected. But now we are in a stall. The Ostrogoths are clearly unable to go beyond Pannonia. The Romans at the moment are unable to give the last blow to them. Similar situation in the East. Ah I can't wait for the next update...