Majorian avoids his assassination

Can the WRE survive with Majorian?

  • Possible

    Votes: 39 88.6%
  • Not Possible

    Votes: 5 11.4%

  • Total voters
    44
Who would Majorian have chosen if he had no sons? Aegidius? IOTL, after Majorian was assassinated on Ricimer's orders, Aeigidius broke away and formed the Domain of Soissons before being murdered himself. Of course, that could mean any number of things.
Aegidius wouldn't be a bad choice, he seemed capable enough. But from what I can see he was a similar age to Majorian. Ideally Majorian would probably want someone somewhat younger than him so that if he is so lucky so as to actually live to die of old age, his successor won't be following him too soon. Though that would be a small miracle in and of itself.

Perhaps he picks Sygarius, strengthening his ties with Aegidius in Gaul by appointing the man's son as his heir? I have to admit I don't know enough about the other notables in the West at this time to really say. Plus there is also the possibility that the Eastern Emperor sticks his nose into the succession, especially as he had supported the man that Majorian and Ricimer had overthrown if I remember correctly. It would be important to try and rebuild ties to the East.
 
Well the fact that they used foreign troops wasn't necessarily a problem in and of itself. Even during the height of the Empire there was always a sizable foreign contingent. The problem came when they were allowed to all stay together as a single tribe or kingdom with their king becoming in effect a Roman General. These kings would then later often decide to carve up parts of the Empire to "Rule in the Emperor's name" and often there wasn't much the Emperor could really do about it but settle for the polite political fiction. That particular practice had a very serious eroding effect on the Western administration and later economy.

What you want to do instead is break up those foreign troops into smaller units, or even spread them out into existing native units to get them properly integrated into Roman society, prevent foreign Kings from becoming more powerful within the Empire than the Emperor himself and using these troops to strengthen Imperial rule, not weaken it as the late Feodorati system had a tendency to do. You need a solid core of native troops to give the Emperor the power to dictate those terms.
Totally agree here,these troops have to serve directly the empire and not a barbarian king, who is also a "roman" general serving the empire only for its own interest, so the idea of mixing different ethnicity into different units commanded by romans (or heavily romanized barbarians) seem good to me.

Now succession is the really important thing here. I have no doubt that if Majorian retakes Spain, Gaul, and North Africa that he would have absolutely no problems finding a suitable wife if he hadn't already. The question is whether he wants hereditary succession or he goes for the system that arguably served the Empire best in the past and adopting whomever he thought would be the best successor. There are merits to both. Hereditary succession is often seen as inherently more stable, but in the case of the Romans that is absolutely no guarantee and it has often lead to God awful rulers, such as Commodus. Meanwhile a more meritocratic system had, long ago, worked brilliantly to bring a succession of several very capable Emperors to the throne, but has a slightly higher risk of civil war if Majorian goes the way of all capable West Roman leaders of the time and gets assassinated for being good at his job, which is unfortunately likely.
In my opinion an hereditary monarchy would be more stable in the long run, instead of a system where everyone potentially can be emperor if successful enough and is willing to take the power by force. So I would opt for the creation of a new stable dynasty.

A lot will depend on what the East was willing to support. But if Majorian was able to by some miracle bring some stability to Imperial succession he would be arguably the best Roman emperor of all time, on par with Constantine, Aurelian and Diocletian if only for the benefits that would come from the Empire simply not tearing itself to shreds at least once a generation, let alone the sheer feet of reconquering so much lost land.

Without any doubt he would be remembered as the greatest, certainly he would be better known now

Plus there is also the possibility that the Eastern Emperor sticks his nose into the succession, especially as he had supported the man that Majorian and Ricimer had overthrown if I remember correctly. It would be important to try and rebuild ties to the East.
Avitus was proclaimed emperor in Gaul with the help of Theodoric II, but I dont think he was recognized by Marcian. There could be a small chance of the West and East reuniting under a single emperor after Majorian's death. However the support of the East is absolutely necessary.
 
That is due to many factors. For one, Aetius left North Africa out to dry.

But it was supposed to have 10,000 comitatenses.

Second, North Africa was, before that point not under any serious threat, or at least, apparent threat like say, the ever troublesome Gaul and so on the list of priorities for military assets, it was fairly close to the bottom.

North Africa was under very serious threat since the very aftermath of the sack of Rome. Bad weather thwarted gothic plans but IIRC as early as 417 the Theodosian wall was built around Carhago, in anticipation of possible attack.

Third, one of the reasons the West was so chronically short of cash and manpower was to a certain extent a demographic problem, as Latifundia run by major landowners were not willing to let their tenants join the army rather than earn them money

That was a problem since the fourth century but I don't think it was the crux of the problem. The landowners had to furnish men, but many of them would cut off their thumbs rather than serve, or desert. Most citizens just didn't want to fight in the army anymore.

but those same Latifundia were increasingly reluctant to pay any taxes at all, and what taxes they did pay were often being appropriated by corrupt officials before they ever reached the treasury. Add to that the resulting ridiculous tax burden placed on the middle class and suddenly they are cutting the feet out from underneath the economy. It wasn't that the funds did not exist at all, it was that all the money in the empire was rapidly being collected and then sat upon by an increasingly small group of people.

If the problem were that great, the State could've used mercenaries to crush the senators as well as burgundians and others.

Once North Africa was lost, whatever remained of the regular Roman army ceased to exist. They were forced to turn now entirely to feodorati and other mercenaries that already had equipment and training and just had to be paid.

Essentially the regular Roman army ceased to exist in 408, but a residual force persisted.

They still had some bite, as Flavius Aetius proved when he beat the Mongols,

Mongols??! Huns. :)

However the age of the Professional Roman Army in the West was over, as Africa, which was second only to Egypt in wealth as a province, was no longer available to provide food and taxes to support the army.

In fact the regular army was already gone for 20 years before the loss of North Africa. Constantius had to rely on visigoths to fight Vandals in Spain. The point is, the WRE still had adequate funds for a decent regular army even after it evaporated; it just had to use the resources to pay federates or mercenaries, mostly.


.... Maybe go back to the old mainstay of rewarding veteran soldiers with land to help secure their loyalty and help rebuild the Empire's manpower pool.

I dunooo..given the evidence that citizens would no longer serve.
 
Last edited:
Except as I had posted earlier and everyone keeps forgetting Africa was part of a long line of Majorian's reconquests and/or subjugations.
Africa is a vital part of Majorian's project of restauration of the west, that is sure. But here the POD is after his failed invasion from Spain (while avoiding assassination), so he will have to wait at least some years before trying again, maybe this time with more luck.
 
Africa is a vital part of Majorian's project of restoration of the west, that is sure. But here the POD is after his failed invasion from Spain (while avoiding assassination), so he will have to wait at least some years before trying again, maybe this time with more luck.
Yes I know I wasn't talking about the invasion though, I'm just informing everyone that he had been reconquering/subjugating land before the African Invasion which means he still had some form of a base.
 
Yes I know I wasn't talking about the invasion though, I'm just informing everyone that he had been reconquering/subjugating land before the African Invasion which means he still had some form of a base.
Ops sorry, I didn't understand. Surely Africa is the last remaining diocesi that Majorian must recapture (if we don't count Britannia but that can be ignored at the moment) . He did very well in Europe before his defeat, but were the territories in Gaul and Spain safe enough from the still existing and semi autonomous barbarian kingdoms? How serious was the damage inflicted to the economy by years of wars and devastations? Would he be able to properly exploit the territories he recently recovered?
 

ar-pharazon

Banned
I think if he could retake Iberia and Africa-and deal with his political enemies in Italy then he could stabilize the situation and bring the various barbarian kingdoms into line.

Either through outright reconquest of some sort of vassalage.
 
Ops sorry, I didn't understand. Surely Africa is the last remaining diocese that Majorian must recapture (if we don't count Britannia but that can be ignored at the moment). He did very well in Europe before his defeat, but were the territories in Gaul and Spain safe enough from the still existing and semi-autonomous barbarian kingdoms? How serious was the damage inflicted to the economy by years of wars and devastations? Would he be able to properly exploit the territories he recently recovered?
I was only really posting the fact above but from what I can glean from Wikipedia and its references it seems that Africa was the last one he wanted to focus on and all threats around him in the form of the barbarian kingdoms were reduced to foederati which according to Sidonius Apollinaris, Carmina, V.441–442 he used barbarian troops to support his core army as well but it does seem they were a large part of it but the barbarians seemed to be led by Romans Majorian trusted. He also seemed to recognise the need for economic and political reform which can be read up on his page. Whether he could exploit them I can't tell you as he wasn't around long enough to but his ability to appease people and utilise their abilities makes me feel he would.

I think if he could retake Iberia and Africa-and deal with his political enemies in Italy then he could stabilize the situation and bring the various barbarian kingdoms into line.

Either through outright reconquest of some sort of vassalage.
Except as we've been discussing aside from Africa he already had for many of them.
 
Who would Majorian have chosen if he had no sons? Aegidius? IOTL, after Majorian was assassinated on Ricimer's orders, Aeigidius broke away and formed the Domain of Soissons before being murdered himself. Of course, that could mean any number of things.
I think Julius Nepos and Anthemius are more likely.
 
ricimer deaded.png

low effort map
The Eastern Empire probably has to take a hands off approach to church matters (let the Copts do Copt things in Egypt, let the Syriacs do Syriac things in Syria) to survive the coming Arab and Turk invasions.

How do you think a saved Western Empire evolves? The Western Emperor will probably have to skilfully manage the church, and as a consequence keep it in line with Greek Orthodoxy. It will probably need to encourage civic participation to overcome the decline. Needing to be parsimonious with funds and manpower, the West probably wont take on the Germans, which means it will be separated from Soissons.

Soissons may go to a democratic republic set up to encourage its own patriotism. To survive they will have to be lucky and Franks unlucky. It will get refugees from Britain, which given its isolation from the Empire means that the dominant religion may be whatever is practiced in Britain. They will likely have a free practice of religion in this country.

Britain, unified and defended by Northumbria's fighting Celtic Shaolin and a powerful navy, develops its own form of Orthodoxy due to a separation from the Empire. Lacking a patriarch, the Ionian (Ionic?) style of Christianity becomes episcopalian in organization like the Arian Germans on the continent.
 
PuffyClouds I have posted a map twice on this
I glossed over your posts and didn't see it. Looking back, I didn't see your links right away either.

Avalon said:
Quite simply your map is wrong.
Yeah, well, you know that's just like, uhh, your opinion man.
low effort map
:openedeyewink::openedeyewink::openedeyewink:

Avalon said:
to show Majorian's previous conquest before the attempt in Africa.
Do you think the West could actually hold so much of Gaul and Iberia going into the future? I also portrayed the Ostrogoths as destroyed (joint East-West venture) and those lands reincorporated into the West.
 
@Avalon
I don't think Rome is sustainable by using foreign soldiers, it will need Roman soldiers. I don't think Majorian, and his immediate successors, will have enough Roman soldiers to maintain what he conquered in Europe the next instance the barbarians raise enough momentum to attack. I think the opportune thing to do is to pick some stooges, and tell them to run the areas and provide tribute to Rome at the threat of a punitive expedition. So that, plus a good navy should keep Africa out of German hands.

It's all really pointless though when some functionary or princess turns traitor and invites the barbarians in to destroy all the hardwork of better men.
 
Top