Gods in the West, God in the East

"One can be undeniable in the favor of the Gods, for on the Battle of the Frigid River the Winds did not blow abit, as if the Gods commanded the rebellious and tempermentual Boreas Aquilo held despite it being the season. Thus surrounded on all sides the Christian Emperor Theodosius army fell, cursing his own Lord as he fled into the night. Thus the "Paganism" of the West was saved." The Triumph of Eugenius

Would say, a victory at the Battle of Frigidus halt the reunification and Christinization of the Western Roman Empire?
 
"One can be undeniable in the favor of the Gods, for on the Battle of the Frigid River the Winds did not blow abit, as if the Gods commanded the rebellious and tempermentual Boreas Aquilo held despite it being the season. Thus surrounded on all sides the Christian Emperor Theodosius army fell, cursing his own Lord as he fled into the night. Thus the "Paganism" of the West was saved." The Triumph of Eugenius

Would say, a victory at the Battle of Frigidus halt the reunification and Christinization of the Western Roman Empire?

Tomb

It's a scenario that I have considered occasionally. The last real chance for a 'pagan' state to survive and also possibly for a western Roman empire to survive.

You would however need good leadership and some luck. Also probably to follow up the victory by a later invasion of the east. Otherwise a powerful Christian state would continue to exist and probably be a fatal threat to the western one. [Not saying a successful conquest of the entire east but enough that between it, the Persians and various Germanic/Hunnic etc. invasions the eastern empire goes down rather than the west and preferably the west secures say the Balkans and Anatolia].

Steve
 
An earlier POD could be easier to save paganism. Perhaps Maximian winning the Battle of the Milvian Bridge could suffice?
 
Ah but I am delibertly trying to get a Pagan Western Europa and a Christian East.

Tomb

That is more difficult, both because of the hostility between the two [by this time period] and the long established history of a united empire. As such any decently secure ruler of either state will look to 'restore' the empire and stamp out religious heritics by defeating their opponents.

It might be possible but its going to be difficult to maintain the two as viable states.

Steve
 
Who said that I wanted them to remain as viable states? Just really, a significant and decidedly Pagan Population in the West and a Christian East.

You see also at this battle were such key figures as....Timasius, Stilicho, Gainas and Alaric....pretty much a large portion of the Military Hierarchy of East Rome....it seems like with their death, the East Empire seems pretty open for invasion.
 
Last edited:
Who said that I wanted them to remain as viable states? Just really, a significant and decidedly Pagan Population in the West and a Christian East.

You see also at this battle were such key figures as....Timasius, Stilicho, Gainas and Alaric....pretty much a large portion of the Military Hierarchy of East Rome....it seems like with their death, the East Empire seems pretty open for invasion.

Tomb

Ah, that is different. As you say it could leave the east very open to invasion. A serious defeat, possibly followed by a struggle for power could be accompanied by invasions by the Sassanids and also the various German and Hunnic powers to the north. It could see the eastern empire seriously reduced if not destroyed, in the process possibly taking a lot of pressure off the western empire.

What could be an alternative would be if some of the Goths survive the disaster, especially if they do so by objecting to Theodosius's use of them as cannon fodder and defect before the defeat. That would make them potential scape-goats, especially with the religious tensions between Orthodox and Arians and possibly prompt some additional internal conflict.

Steve
 
Tomb

Ah, that is different. As you say it could leave the east very open to invasion. A serious defeat, possibly followed by a struggle for power could be accompanied by invasions by the Sassanids and also the various German and Hunnic powers to the north. It could see the eastern empire seriously reduced if not destroyed, in the process possibly taking a lot of pressure off the western empire.

What could be an alternative would be if some of the Goths survive the disaster, especially if they do so by objecting to Theodosius's use of them as cannon fodder and defect before the defeat. That would make them potential scape-goats, especially with the religious tensions between Orthodox and Arians and possibly prompt some additional internal conflict.

Steve

I'e mapped out four different scenarios, which I am debating and more or less their results seem to be the destruction of either Empire after a Goth (I am looking at Pagan Fravitta being either the Emperor or joinning the West with much of the Balkans) conquering Constantinople so Argobast overthrows the Senate, I am looking at a Gothic take over of the Balkans with the East moving to Egypt, etc. I want the West standing and to do that the East needs to not be taken over by a Non-Roman but not powerful enough to attack the West, or I could simply have the West uniting the East.

I already have grounds for a Pagan Victory but I am being deliberate in wanting a clear divide of the West Pagan and East Christian.
 
I doubt it would have worked that way.

Christianity was on the rise. It had been the official state religion for 2 generations (according to the Wiki article).

Sure, a Western victory would have meant a return to 'official' paganism, but so what? There had been a pagan emperor in between, and that didn't last.

I'm guessing that the West goes Christian in 10 -20 years, even if the East doesn't invade.
 
If you want the division to last, probably Eugenius' victory should be followed by complementary religious persecutions in both empires, so that Eastern pagans flee west and Western Christians flee East.

Also, I imagine that in the new pagan West, the deification of Julian becomes a bigger part of the religion; he'd be sort of a Julius Caesar to Eugenius' Augustus (though with a much longer intervening period).
 
I doubt it would have worked that way.

Christianity was on the rise. It had been the official state religion for 2 generations (according to the Wiki article).

Sure, a Western victory would have meant a return to 'official' paganism, but so what? There had been a pagan emperor in between, and that didn't last.

I'm guessing that the West goes Christian in 10 -20 years, even if the East doesn't invade.

Religions they come...they go...they come back. Look at Hinduism and Buddhism in India.
 
You really need to think about the presentation of your "Pagan" revival. The Church organization was the true reason for Christianity's success. The Church and is offices were deeply entrenched into the admin-structure of the Empire, with bishops becoming salaried civil servants and even going over the heads of prefects and vicarii when appealing to the Emperor. One would need a counter-organization steaped in the Roman/Greek polytheistic beliefs and cultural values to fufil the same capacity as the Christian Church. Even by Theodosius' time, the bulk of the Roman population was still polytheistic at heart, with church attendance and baptism being a legal obligation. Simply relying on the old decentralized system of part-time priests and local hereditary cults isn't going to help much. You'll also need some sort of cohesive ideology underlining the surviving Paganism. Polytheisms tend to be ethnic or cultural-based. But what you may need is some sort of written articles or chronology to support your Pagan Ecclesia.
 
I do believe Julian had a solution to it, and was during hi time woring on creating such aorganization.
 
Tomb

I think it would be difficult because Christianity is so presuasive and by this time determined on gaining power. However as said the sort of organised faith structure that Julian was working on would be a big bonus, although it could become as oppressive and destructive as Christianity if their not careful.

As said some degree of mutual discrimination would be beneficial to you're aims and I think their pretty likely. Persecution would likely to increase in the east given there is a clear rival to the church and also fear that it's success might incite rebellion from the still numerous pagans in the east. In the west there is also likely to be measures to discriminate against Christians while the relations with the powerful Archbishop of Milan - forget his name - are likely to be rocky. [Think Arbogast, the real power behind the rebellion in the west had threaten to stable his horses in the cathedral at Milan on returning given the hostility of the archbishop]. You could easily see a christian uprising in Italy which is likely to be put down fairly bloodily given the relations. At the time I think relatively few people had formally converted and a lot of this was for political reasons so I think Arbogast would win fairly easily. You might also see various groups seeking to say gain lands and other resources from Christian groups - a reveral of earlier Christian gains.

Steve
 
Top