Suppose that the Lombards do far less well in their wars with the Gepids, leaving them too disorganized to lead a migration across the Alps after the Avars arrive.
Presumably this means that Italy remains under the control of Constantinople for at least some time longer. Might Italy then have enough of a reprieve to recover from the Gothic Wars?
Even if currently devastated, Italy surely could be a valuable and productive area for the Empire given time and a consolidation of Eastern Roman rule. Might a gradually recovering Italy allow for the slow restoration of the economy of the Western Mediterranean? Granted, the Romans are almost certain to lose their footholds in Hispania, but Italy and North Africa together are a much stronger economic unit, and if political accommodation can be reached with the Visigoths in Spain and whoever it is that manages to establish themselves in southern Gaul, the pieces are in place for trade to slowly and gradually knit them back together economically.
That is though contingent on Constantinople not losing Italy and North Africa to other invasions or local rebellion. Italy's recovery and political integration into Eastern rule might be a fragile thing, and Justinian's successors might not have the delicate touch necessary to hold it. On the other hand, a recovering Italy added to Constantinople's tax revenues and manpower might reduce the need for especially harsh and heavy taxation.
One thing that does occur to me is that with the Empire far more involved in the West, it may have the opportunity for small-scale recruitment from the Germanic tribes and kingdoms. The original POD offers the potential for some of the Germanic tribes displaced by the Avars to be resettled within the the Empire (preferably on a small scale, in places where they can be controlled), with military service obligations.
So, without the Lombards, can a Roman Italy stabilize and recover?
Presumably this means that Italy remains under the control of Constantinople for at least some time longer. Might Italy then have enough of a reprieve to recover from the Gothic Wars?
Even if currently devastated, Italy surely could be a valuable and productive area for the Empire given time and a consolidation of Eastern Roman rule. Might a gradually recovering Italy allow for the slow restoration of the economy of the Western Mediterranean? Granted, the Romans are almost certain to lose their footholds in Hispania, but Italy and North Africa together are a much stronger economic unit, and if political accommodation can be reached with the Visigoths in Spain and whoever it is that manages to establish themselves in southern Gaul, the pieces are in place for trade to slowly and gradually knit them back together economically.
That is though contingent on Constantinople not losing Italy and North Africa to other invasions or local rebellion. Italy's recovery and political integration into Eastern rule might be a fragile thing, and Justinian's successors might not have the delicate touch necessary to hold it. On the other hand, a recovering Italy added to Constantinople's tax revenues and manpower might reduce the need for especially harsh and heavy taxation.
One thing that does occur to me is that with the Empire far more involved in the West, it may have the opportunity for small-scale recruitment from the Germanic tribes and kingdoms. The original POD offers the potential for some of the Germanic tribes displaced by the Avars to be resettled within the the Empire (preferably on a small scale, in places where they can be controlled), with military service obligations.
So, without the Lombards, can a Roman Italy stabilize and recover?