Leo's Invasion of Africa results in ERE control?

AD 468, The invasion of the North African Vandal kingdom succeeds, and the Eastern Roman military occupies the capital. What are the odds that they would attempt to maintain administrative and military control over the region?
 
AD 468, The invasion of the North African Vandal kingdom succeeds, and the Eastern Roman military occupies the capital. What are the odds that they would attempt to maintain administrative and military control over the region?

Slim, I think. The whole effort was part of a two pronged plan by Constantinople to prop up the west. The first part had already succeeded, with the reigning Western Emperor Anthemius a former Eastern general. I can't see Leo I wanting to undermine Anthemius.
 
Slim, I think. The whole effort was part of a two pronged plan by Constantinople to prop up the west. The first part had already succeeded, with the reigning Western Emperor Anthemius a former Eastern general. I can't see Leo I wanting to undermine Anthemius.

Err... But they sure wouldn't want Barbarians to take the kingdom back (whether Vandals, Xgoths, or tribesmen from the desert). Given how shaky the WRE was at that point (wasn't it?), setting up a e.g. Tetrarchy, with 4 Caesars (and de facto 3 of them reporting to Byzantium) might make a lot of sense.
 
Err... But they sure wouldn't want Barbarians to take the kingdom back (whether Vandals, Xgoths, or tribesmen from the desert). Given how shaky the WRE was at that point (wasn't it?), setting up a e.g. Tetrarchy, with 4 Caesars (and de facto 3 of them reporting to Byzantium) might make a lot of sense.

No, that experiment had been tried and the end result was failure. As for Africa being retaken, I doubt it. Any successful invasion would be more than enough to break the backs of any local barbarians and the berbers in the mountains are a minor threat, at least in the existential sense, they wouldn't be toppling Roman control in Africa.

The West was shaky, in the sense that it's success depended on too many externally controlled factors. You tip too many things out of their favour and they fall like dominoes, but not putting Africa under their control would be a stupid move for everyone. You split up imperial authority further by leaving Africa to its own means which hurts the legitimacy of the East and West as well as complicating the recognition of new Emperors and may even stunt the recovery of the West. By keeping it away from the West you stifle their control over the much needed grain and wealth which they could extract from Africa. When you have more food and money you can better fund and feed an army with which to bolster the security of a region, under the Africa that wealth and food stays largely local (they'd still be trading extensively but there's still going to be bureaucratic meddling in that sort of business when there's a nominally equal authority in control of your food).
 
Err... But they sure wouldn't want Barbarians to take the kingdom back (whether Vandals, Xgoths, or tribesmen from the desert).
How? The Vandals were raiding the sea for at least a few years before they were able to master it enough to cross over into Africa. And even then, it's possible that Boniface had something to do with helping them across. It was a one in a million fluke chance that they got to Africa. How difficult it is to actually get to Africa for barbarians was put on full display by how horribly Alaric's plans for the Goths to sail there failed.

North Africa is the key to preserving the western roman empire. It is what makes an empire on the verge of collapse no longer on the verge of collapse. It has both a massive tax base, and the grain necessary to feed Italy and feed the west's armies. The Western Empire can't survive without it, and they can't be destroyed with it. There would be no question as to what Leo will do when he retakes it-the Western Roman Emperor, Anthemius was his man. He was the counter to Ricimer (who wont survive very long in this scenario) that Leo trusts to restore the strength of the west. Leo wouldn't waste all this time and resources just to take North Africa for himself, considering it's not very important to the eastern empire, but its vital for the western empire.
 
Btw, even Justinian never conquered entire Africa back, like we know it from maps of the principate. They just controlled the area around Carthago and a few cities at the coast. The entire hinterland was controlled by african tribes, especially in both Mauretanias, Tripolitania and Cyrenaica.

But I agree with Sly: Africa or not Africa, was the question these days for the WRE. Even if from an EREs point of view, the WRE was just a rather weak Augustus, perhaps just worth a Caesar or another prefect these days.
 
Last edited:
Top