Well if Rome can beat the Goths then they might have some place to place the Alans
On eastern shores – A Roman Timeline
- Thread starter Alcsentre Calanice
- Start date
A theme system gives more power to the provinces (and to the local governors) - this would lead to a feudalization of the empire, or at least to a total decentralization of the empire, which is now still Legalist.
That would fit with the current Legalist administration, but with a more decentralized Theme Empire? I don't know. It may meet serious opposition among the aristocracy.
You found a mistake
Very good. Give me a cool name and I'll change it on future maps.=====
Caput Duodetricesimus: Raids
Once the Goths had assembled a decent fleet on the Black Sea and gained experience in shipping, they started to wage war against the Pontic cities. In Colchis, Oninantheia, Pityus, Sebastopolis and the capital Phasis were looted in 1008 AUC [1]; Trapezusai, Sinope, Chalkedon and Nikomedia followed in 1009 AUC [2].
Only when he Gothis ships attacked Byzantion, Kyzikos and Perinthos in 1010 AUC [3], the Roman Black Sea flotilla started to take it seriously and organized patrols to contain Gothic attacks and piracy. Several Gothic ships were destroyed, and the Roman Empire provided a generous amount of money to rebuild the cities with fortifications, attempting to prevent further raids on these places. This however didn't solve the problems overpopulation caused in the Gutthiuda (the land of the Goths).
The Goths had already expanded south-eastwards and affirmed their superiority over the western steppe (also known as the Pontic Steppe). The new Gothic dominance forced the Alans, a Sarmatian people, to retreat eastwards and cross the Tanais [4]. There, they met the opposition of the Huns and hand no other choice than to march southwards, raiding the Roman client kingdoms of Albania and Iberia.
The Alanic problem finally convinced Rome to take military action against Gutthiuda, and in 1015 AUC [5], Theoclia [6] sent Lucius to Tomi to prepare a campaign. Then came the First Persian War, and Lucius had to organize the defense against Persia. Thus, instead of defeating warriors on the Danubian border, he marched eastwards, and the Goths had the time to organize the next invasions.
Effectively, Cannabaudes used his position to centralize Gothia – not only to reinforce his political position as Judge of all Goths, but also to solve the Gothic economic problems: Overpopulation and the lack of fertile land within the steppe. However, none of Cannabaudes' interior solutions were viable over the long term, so it was clear that the Goths would need to take the needed goods from others.
And everyone knew who these others were...
[1] 255 CE
[2] 256 CE
[3] 257 CE
[4] The Don River
[5] 262 CE
[6] Emperor Alexander's sister, Lucius' aunt, the power behind the throne
Military action in the Black Sea, the interlude
Well, since Lusius Quietus replaced Hadrian, this world's Adrianopolis could be called Lusopolis or Quietopolis.
Actually, didn't you call it Traianopolis earlier?
Actually, didn't you call it Traianopolis earlier?
Traianopolis and Hadrianopolis are two different cities.
I see. I was referring to Page 14, where Hadrianopolis is labeled as Traianopolis.
No it won't.You are actually weakening the power of the provinces.You will be instigating themes(more like a fubing system),but military and civilian governance will still be separated.'Themes' will be more like army districts only.The Qin Dynasty itself had a lot of part-time soldiers who are demobilized during peace time.
Did Septimius Severus forbid senators from leading armies in this timeline?If he did,it won't matter.Either way,if the Severans had no trouble forbidding senators from leading armies in OTL,stopping commanders from bringing their families with them to the provinces is child's play.I suggest rotating commanders between commanding the comitatus and commanding troops in the provincial command.You really don't want commanders in the capital to have little military experience either.
Last edited:
You know all this talk of having generals have their families hostage in the capital gives me an Idea.
What if a rebellious region/people within the Empire were to be forced into auxiliary units and have their families be forced into Prison camps and are then forced to fight for the Empire or everyone you know and love gets days of long torture before finally dying. No reason to keep the families like crap though I'm sure they could be given Wine and meats in order for them to be at least less inclined to feel overly wronged and keep the peace better.
If this works then you suddenly have a unit willing to be thrown into the meatgrinder or else their family gets whacked.
It would take a practical psychopath to even think of practically utilizing it though. Probably wouldn't be a common occurrence but might be done once or twice if there is a large enough threat to utterly cripple the Empire (see: Huns).
What if a rebellious region/people within the Empire were to be forced into auxiliary units and have their families be forced into Prison camps and are then forced to fight for the Empire or everyone you know and love gets days of long torture before finally dying. No reason to keep the families like crap though I'm sure they could be given Wine and meats in order for them to be at least less inclined to feel overly wronged and keep the peace better.
If this works then you suddenly have a unit willing to be thrown into the meatgrinder or else their family gets whacked.
It would take a practical psychopath to even think of practically utilizing it though. Probably wouldn't be a common occurrence but might be done once or twice if there is a large enough threat to utterly cripple the Empire (see: Huns).
Pretty much every Chinese dynasty ever had part-time soldiers.
Pretty much,which is why all the talk about part-time soldiers not fitting a legalist regime doesn't make sense.
I'm currently not writing at all because I'm seriously thinking what's the most plausible option for the future of this TL. Let's sum up
1) Rome conquered Mesopotamia and never stopped expanding.
2) The contact with China brought ideas of centralization and Legalist government to Rome.
3) The Legalist Roman government of the Severans had the ressources to expand even more.
But here's the point: Can Rome continue to expand (into Gothia, Francia and Persia)? Or does the empire need a pause because it's overstretched? Is the empire even governable as it is? Would it become completly ungovernable if it expanded into Germania, Gothia or Persia?
I mean, the empire hasn't the strong enemies it had in OTL's 3rd century. The Alemanni were integrated into the Agri Decumates and Persia is much weaker than OTL because it lacks Mesopotamia. Without these endless wars, the inflation is under control and the economic crisis due to incursions and civil war isn't a thing. The army doesn't play the role it played in OTL in the 3rd century, thus usurpations aren't that easy, and Rome is still the center of the empire because the borders aren't that threatened.
On the other hand, the communication lines are very stretched. How long would a letter take from Hibernia to Babylonia? Three or four months, maybe. If Rome expands even more, it will need viceroys supervising the local governors too far away to be directly controlled by the emperor (just like the viceroys in the Spanish Empire). Viceroys however are a threat to the Empire's unity and could lead to the division in different states.
Also, there are maybe coefficients I didn't consider.
What do you think?
Prison Camps. Very interesting.
Well, military and civilian governors arge already separated, so in fact, it might make no difference at all. But the Theme system will not appear magically, so we have to wait for the Roman emperors to develop it.
1) Rome conquered Mesopotamia and never stopped expanding.
2) The contact with China brought ideas of centralization and Legalist government to Rome.
3) The Legalist Roman government of the Severans had the ressources to expand even more.
But here's the point: Can Rome continue to expand (into Gothia, Francia and Persia)? Or does the empire need a pause because it's overstretched? Is the empire even governable as it is? Would it become completly ungovernable if it expanded into Germania, Gothia or Persia?
I mean, the empire hasn't the strong enemies it had in OTL's 3rd century. The Alemanni were integrated into the Agri Decumates and Persia is much weaker than OTL because it lacks Mesopotamia. Without these endless wars, the inflation is under control and the economic crisis due to incursions and civil war isn't a thing. The army doesn't play the role it played in OTL in the 3rd century, thus usurpations aren't that easy, and Rome is still the center of the empire because the borders aren't that threatened.
On the other hand, the communication lines are very stretched. How long would a letter take from Hibernia to Babylonia? Three or four months, maybe. If Rome expands even more, it will need viceroys supervising the local governors too far away to be directly controlled by the emperor (just like the viceroys in the Spanish Empire). Viceroys however are a threat to the Empire's unity and could lead to the division in different states.
Also, there are maybe coefficients I didn't consider.
What do you think?
Prison Camps. Very interesting.
Well, military and civilian governors arge already separated, so in fact, it might make no difference at all. But the Theme system will not appear magically, so we have to wait for the Roman emperors to develop it.
Rome won't stop it's conquest, but it would have to pause for a period of internal reorganization and also come up with a much more cost effective colonization scheme.
So, they might create companies controlled by the government that would economical dominate colonies instead of direct annexation. This system would use natives into it's colonial military to police the locals, with the cost of maintaining them coming from profits of the colony itself.
So, they might create companies controlled by the government that would economical dominate colonies instead of direct annexation. This system would use natives into it's colonial military to police the locals, with the cost of maintaining them coming from profits of the colony itself.
Other than
?I think the Roman Emperors need to either consider a movement of their capital so that the fringes aren't the fringes any more. (Basically a capital in the East), or, a serious overhaul of communications. Perhaps the development of a Pony-Express style system to reduce communcation times in the Empire (heck, if they can do Atlantic to Pacific in 10 days, the Empire can surely bring 4 months down to at worst 20 days)
Perhaps this could be inspired by the Persian Royal Road, and combine it with the ideas of Caravanserai.
This isn't cheap, especially to have it function in many directions around the Empire rather than just East to West, but a nodal network of caravanserai and all-night riders would make Rome a practical capital for much longer.
An additional option would be to include/use small but fast craft for transporting messages across the Mediterranean. That would certainly save on costs, if those boats would be reliable.
Plus, if the caravanserai are funded directly by the Emperor rather than the provinces, they can be used as a vast internal intelligence network too.
Oh, I think that @Agricola often mentioned a possible system of messengers.
So some kind of protectorates instead of provinces?
In addition to that, what about a sort of signal relay system from various borders inward? The Eastern Romans would develop just such a system iotl in response to Muslim border raids/invasions and it proved very effective. Obviously this Roman Empire is a hell of a lot bigger than 9th century Byzantium but the principle is still sound up to a point. Obviously seas pose a limit, but getting messages to big cities like Antioch quickly would still be a major boon. Though what could be communicated over such a relay is obviously limited, I imagine some sort of signal system could be worked out to get basic messages clearly communicated.
I do hope that a split in the empire will occur because as I said before an independent New Persian empire with a whole lot of Romano-Greek undertones would be pretty cool.
But dividing the Empire like that could cause civil war so in order to get the benefits of splitting the empire while not instigating would be to not divide it by east and west but by North and south.
Hear me out, if the Roman parts of Germany, Northern Gaul, the British Isles, and maybe pats of the Danube frontier were to form it's own separate Empire or at the least have it's own Emperor with only one senate still in Rome (I think this was OTL at some point), It would have to be very reliant on the Southern Empire so civil war would reaaaaaly hurt them and with pretty much all their territory on the border of fearsome barbarians I think they'll quickly learn that trying to be stupid and scream "I WANNA BE EMPRAH" then leave you're post for thousands of farms to be burnt and pillaged is going to be a bad idea.
Yes the North would not be very self reliant but it could be a good way for Gaul and Brittania to develop properly as they would be the only provinces not in danger of invasion, revolt perhaps but not Invasion.
They would have to set up some sort of system where the North would be capable of recruiting from the south and other things.
Eh, like I said I don't think this could be widespread and there would most likely be a thousand ways it could go wrong but an Emperor might set this up in Dacia or something or Germania in order to bolster defenses while keeping revolts low
Simple, in the cities create a new 'city maintenance' tax and if you too poor and can't pay it you get a free ride to the Colonies. Should also reduce crime because most crimes are committed by poor people (usually because they're tired of being poor).
Well as for this topic, you probably won't be able to have a Perisan Road but you may be able to have a whole lot of small ones. Like one from Charax to Antioch and a Deva to Londinium and various ones like such. I'm not going to claim to have expert knowledge on this but boats do tend to be faster then Horses and yes they do have a chance of sinking but I don't thank that chance of sinking is any greater than being attacked by Bandits along the long winding roads in the country.
But dividing the Empire like that could cause civil war so in order to get the benefits of splitting the empire while not instigating would be to not divide it by east and west but by North and south.
Hear me out, if the Roman parts of Germany, Northern Gaul, the British Isles, and maybe pats of the Danube frontier were to form it's own separate Empire or at the least have it's own Emperor with only one senate still in Rome (I think this was OTL at some point), It would have to be very reliant on the Southern Empire so civil war would reaaaaaly hurt them and with pretty much all their territory on the border of fearsome barbarians I think they'll quickly learn that trying to be stupid and scream "I WANNA BE EMPRAH" then leave you're post for thousands of farms to be burnt and pillaged is going to be a bad idea.
Yes the North would not be very self reliant but it could be a good way for Gaul and Brittania to develop properly as they would be the only provinces not in danger of invasion, revolt perhaps but not Invasion.
They would have to set up some sort of system where the North would be capable of recruiting from the south and other things.
Eh, like I said I don't think this could be widespread and there would most likely be a thousand ways it could go wrong but an Emperor might set this up in Dacia or something or Germania in order to bolster defenses while keeping revolts low
Simple, in the cities create a new 'city maintenance' tax and if you too poor and can't pay it you get a free ride to the Colonies. Should also reduce crime because most crimes are committed by poor people (usually because they're tired of being poor).
Well as for this topic, you probably won't be able to have a Perisan Road but you may be able to have a whole lot of small ones. Like one from Charax to Antioch and a Deva to Londinium and various ones like such. I'm not going to claim to have expert knowledge on this but boats do tend to be faster then Horses and yes they do have a chance of sinking but I don't thank that chance of sinking is any greater than being attacked by Bandits along the long winding roads in the country.
So what would be a good eastern Capital though?
Honestly moving the capital at all would require a big event that would make people not care that the historic capital filled with about a thousand years of rich history and tradition would be moved or just have the Empire split, buut ignoring what I just said about the complications of moving the Capital I have a few Ideas
1. Antioch, people have been saying this so eh.
2. Nikomedia
3. Perinthos
4. Athens because of historic value (that is if Rome isn't anti-Greek like it used to be, if they're accepting Chinese things then they'll probably see the Greeks like cousins in comparison)
5. Thessalonia, former capital of Macedonia that spawned Alexander the great. Could definitely get some prestige out of this.
6. Pahpos of Cyprus, because Cyprus is an Island in a sea that the Parthians have no coast on they would have a pretty hard time invading. But being on an Island could cause other problems like communication
7. pretty much anywhere in Anatolia seems like a good option
8. Renovate Byzantion like OTL, this way ruling over the middle east would be easier and ruling over the frontiers to the north would be too.
Honestly moving the capital at all would require a big event that would make people not care that the historic capital filled with about a thousand years of rich history and tradition would be moved or just have the Empire split, buut ignoring what I just said about the complications of moving the Capital I have a few Ideas
1. Antioch, people have been saying this so eh.
2. Nikomedia
3. Perinthos
4. Athens because of historic value (that is if Rome isn't anti-Greek like it used to be, if they're accepting Chinese things then they'll probably see the Greeks like cousins in comparison)
5. Thessalonia, former capital of Macedonia that spawned Alexander the great. Could definitely get some prestige out of this.
6. Pahpos of Cyprus, because Cyprus is an Island in a sea that the Parthians have no coast on they would have a pretty hard time invading. But being on an Island could cause other problems like communication
7. pretty much anywhere in Anatolia seems like a good option
8. Renovate Byzantion like OTL, this way ruling over the middle east would be easier and ruling over the frontiers to the north would be too.
Skallagrim
Banned
Would be a good candidate because of location. Possibly the best option if there are to be two capitals and eastern expansion is the goal. With Mesopotamia in Roman hands, Antioch would already make sense as an additional capital - if you'd want one - and if further provinces and/or client states in the east are a goal, the useful position of Antioch as a second capital (when compared to Byzantion) is only underscored.
Would both be inferior to using Byzantion, which is right there at the strategic spot.
Are both only really interesting out of historical value. In choosing a new capital, the Romans would not let such factors weigh heavier than strategic interests.
The fact that it's way out there on an island pretty much rule it out.
As long as it's easy to reach. A capital that's very hard to communicate with will become an 'inland island', and useless for the same reasons as an actual island.
Best option if you want to move the capital, but want to stick with one capital. If further eastern expansion is the way of the future, a move of the capital to Byzantion (but sticking with one capital) would be my recommendation. (I'd say that's better than having two capitals.)
But... if there is to be no more eastern expansion, and Rome's current eastern borders (or something very much like them) will be definitive... I'd say: just stick with Rome as the capital and invest in a good communication network.
Yes it can expand a bit more. But just a bit. And it is always a challenge regarding usurpation. Particulary in the East.
However, I guess more expansion is required and possible. Not much. Just to reach shorter and/or better defensible borders or structures.
But no! Rome can't expand! Even not a bit! If you don't start to explain, adress and solve the multiple internal issues of this huge empire, you can't expand. No, the empire ot the 2nd century OTL is not able to expand!
But we might develop a different roman empire.
Last edited: