Q: Medieval Western Roman Empire
The West to a great degree, HAD to fracture. Perhaps they could have maintained a nominal loyalty to a nebulous state, but there simply weren't nearly as strong urban centers, and the land wasn't yet prosperous enough to maintain an entire empire on its own in the same way the East was able to. The west had only a few productive centers, and the area became less and less productive with plagues and famines and simple migration. I think perhaps the only answer would be to continue in the vein of Charlemagne, a decentralized feudal state, each king pledging a loyalty to a powerless Emperor. Perhaps in the 12th Century Renaissance they would have been able to strengthen the emperor once more, but until the land was productive again, there isn't the economic power to sustain a strong bureaucracy or really any sort of centralized state.
I think there was a TL about that somewhere. The Ostrogoths were the better off Germanic kingdom that could project power outside its borders. If it maybe conquered Africa and married into the bloodline of one of the emperors then this is possible. The Goths would have to abandon Arianism as that would have warranted Eastern intervention. The Goths needed some more generations of intermingling with the Romans for them to accept them. The Romans during the time of Justin I were openly conspiring against Theoderic to get back the authority of the emperor. Similarly the Byzantines were welcomed by the Romans until the war became costly and brutal. So you would have to get the Romans to not view the Goths as culturally dissimilar to thrm. Perhaps Theoderic could have not separated his Gothic elite from that of the Romans and encouraged intermingling for faster romanization.
I was thinking about Visigoths and Ostrogoths allying/starting a slow process of unification.
I think together they had chances against the Byzantines (Ostrogoths alone almost won under Totila. Damned Narses!)
Arianism wouldn't last forever, but a Gothic victory against Byzantium could make it last few decades longer (Or perhaps the policy started by Totila of allying with the dominated classes could make an earlier conversion easier.).
A conquest of Africa sounds way too complicated, but if the two kingdoms resist to war, plague, national unrest, possible Frankish backstabbers and Islamic invasions and finally unify they do have a chance of getting Tunis or Tangier at some point.
Africa however is the breadbasket of Italy and to form any sweeping conquests you need a fleet. The Ostrogoths would have been crushed by the East had it been seen as an upstart. Once Justinian put in proper resources and focus into Italy it started to fold quickly.
Another possible pod is where Maurice isn’t assassinated. Perhaps he takes a lesson from Justinian and stop reinforcing the armies. Plus with his Eastern front secure and the Balkans retaken from the Avars maybe forces can be freed to retake Italy and cement control over Southern Spain. Maurice had an idea on his sickbed to appoint his other son as Western Emperor. Maybe this is how the Western Empire is reborn.
Curtain Jerker
Donor
How about a POD of either the Vandals don't take over North Africa in 439 or Majorian's expedition to take it back from the Vandals doesn't (literally) go up in flames in 461?
I think once Africa fell that was pretty much it for the WRE economically. Everything after that is just some sort of epilogue.
I think once Africa fell that was pretty much it for the WRE economically. Everything after that is just some sort of epilogue.
Or Justinian has a son and sends Belisarius with a proper army West so Italy folds easier. Then maybe Justinian dies from plague and Justinian’s son is proclaimed the new emperor who promptly appoints a relative as Western Emperor to focus on the Eastern frontier to beat the Parthian. This new Western state with an intact Italy is also given Africa and consolidated with the Romano-Gothic populace and native Romans working together. Eventually with Eastern support they go on to retake Spain and then in a couple generations retake Gaul.
Is it possible for an alt-Belisarius to proclaim himself Emperor of the West and last for any length of time?
No not really. While Belisarius was a legendary commander he could barely control his men. So it isn’t really plausible for him to get his men to declare him as Western Emperor. The only reason he got as far as he did was because he served as Justin’s captain of the guard. He als proved his loyalty to Justinian during the Nika riots and was instrumental in fending off the mob that attempted to storm the Imperial Palace. Even if he accepted the Gothic Crown he had no way of enforcing his rule. The Gothic offer of the Crown was a last ditch attempt by the Gothic nobles to maintain their positions. Belisarius doing this is too much out of character and even if he did it wouldn’t have lasted. Justinian or his heir would have sent an army under Narses to crush the usurpers.
You know i don't think I've ever seen a Soissons/Syagrius TL.
There's one by user Balerion called Syagrius saves the West. Though my main issue is that the SI tries to lead a pagan revival of sorts when it was already on the way out. 40 years after Constantine Julian the Apostate couldn't do it. There's also a timeline where Julius Nepos saves the Western Empire and has it eventually retake Africa. Its by user Flavius Iulius Nepos and I recommend it. It's a very good read with time and detail put into it. There's also the Reign of Romulus Augustus. Realistically though, I think a Syagrius pod is too late to save the West. The Western economy and military apparatus was dead at this point and he only had a couple of mercenaries. It was no wonder that the Franks later steamrolled the Soissons.
I was think more along the lines of "turtle up and try not to get conquered" rather than "save the west", but i see your point none the less.
Although it might be interesting if he escapes to a Britannia thats still mostly held by the romanized britons.