Regnum Britanniae

Was it possible for some roman general or a group of romans to see that the WRE was beyond repair and set up camp in yours truly Britannia. Pod after the roman withdrawal. What will be the effect of a Romanesque kingdom in (1) the next century and (2) Europe overall after that.
 
Last edited:
Was it possible for some roman general or a group of romans to see that the WRE was beyond repair and set up camp in yours truly Britannia.
oh, of course, yes.
that's a good old 'proclaim yourself a Roman emperor' thing.
it was done and quite successfully,
try google search 'British roman empire' or something

Pod after the roman withdrawal.
nope
 
oh, of course, yes.
that's a good old 'proclaim yourself a Roman emperor' thing.
it was done and quite successfully,
try google search 'British roman empire' or something


nope

But if it did occur and a roman state was formed how would the rest of the event go woul the Saxons be successful would the roman elites in Soissons and the rest of the WRE run away to Britain if the Germans are still succesful in this TL.
 
The problem with that is that the independent warlords ruling Britain seemed to have adopted the age-old Celtic tradition of agnatic succession that made the kingdoms that were created as soon as Rome left the island suceptible to division to smaller entities. Each son was given a piece of the inheritance as opposed to the firstborn inheriting everything. Coel Hen(Caelius Votepacus)'s domain in northern Britain was one of the powerful factions in sub-Roman Britain but as soon as he died, his kingdom was divided amongst his sons.

Have Coel Hen start the precedent of absolute patrilineal primogeniture and you have his kingdom remain united after his death. There you have a basis for a Romano-British kingdom to unite the remainder of Roman Britain.
 
The problem with that is that the independent warlords ruling Britain seemed to have adopted the age-old Celtic tradition of agnatic succession that made the kingdoms that were created as soon as Rome left the island suceptible to division to smaller entities. Each son was given a piece of the inheritance as opposed to the firstborn inheriting everything. Coel Hen(Caelius Votepacus)'s domain in northern Britain was one of the powerful factions in sub-Roman Britain but as soon as he died, his kingdom was divided amongst his sons.

Have Coel Hen start the precedent of absolute patrilineal primogeniture and you have his kingdom remain united after his death. There you have a basis for a Romano-British kingdom to unite the remainder of Roman Britain.

Indeed, tho it'll be more Romano-British Kingdom than Roman Empire in Britain.
What is needed is to avoid the military division that occured alongside the withdrawal of the Legions.
Have each civil admininstration (ie the Kingdoms) recognise a single Dux Britanniae in charge of the troops and you can maintain some semblance of unity.
It won;t be enough to stop Saxon etal settlement but it could limit it to the east and then bring those Kingdoms in later under an imperial restoration.
 
Could you make an effort when writing your posts? I don't want to be annoying, but they aren't most easy to read. Thanks.

First, I'd point to you a very similar thread you made some months ago, and another recent one.

Was it possible for some roman general or a group of romans to see that the WRE was beyond repair and set up camp in yours truly Britannia. Pod after the roman withdrawal.
Then the answer is in your post : after the roman withdrawal, you didn't have a roman army to speak of, meaning no general, critically when early Vth century WRE was far from being "beyond repair" (it really began being so by the mid and latter part of the century).

That said, if your question is : could a post-Imperial state could exist in Britain in the Vth century, then yes pretty much.

Critically giving that it was what happened IOTL : Saxons didn't pop up and conquered all the island the moment the province was abandoned, and while the provincial structures vanished (being based on imperial authority) the Britto-Roman cities/tribes were maintained and formed entities of their own.

Having, however, an unified entity defining itself as Roman isn't much likely.
As I mentioned you before, the identitary features were the pagi, the tribes. Not really a sense of romanity that wasn't much present past the South-Western cities, and virtually absent from half of the province.

But if it did occur and a roman state was formed how would the rest of the event go woul the Saxons be successful
The Romano-Britton structures were particularly divided (even if some form of high-kinghip may have existed in some regions, as Riothamus name, or rather title, seems to imply) and, after the Roman withdrawal, in need of fighters against Pictish, Gaelic (and probably Northern Britons) raids : Saxons simply came in handy on this matter.
 
Last edited:
Indeed, tho it'll be more Romano-British Kingdom than Roman Empire in Britain.

Some times ago, I posted this possibility about a Romano-British ensemble.

We know that they were unifying commands (I'd tend to argue they were more regional and circonstantial than pan-Briton : as Vortigern for the Cantium), at least military-wise : Riothamus/Ambrosius Aurelianus (possibly the same person) is an exemple. So the problem isn't having unifying features, but to make them last against the various and conflicting identities.

It doesn't seem, for instance, that the Old North kingdoms had a much develloped sense of commonity, for all we know.

Now, I think it's possible to have a maintained high-kingship (pretty much as in Ireland, Wales or Scotland) in some regions. Giving the not that much unified Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, it does have a chance to lives on and leading to a wanked *Wales. I don't know enough to definitely name a candidate or a most likely place (while I think that you can forget about North Sea regions); but the bonus point is that you don't even need a Britton or being totally hostile to Germans to have such.

Cerdic of Wessex may be the most obvious exemple of a mix of Britto-Romans and Barbarian elements in the Vth century (you have other ones). It wouldn't surprise me if you could have a Britto-Roman high-king, supported by the Saxons of the Litus managing to lead a more or less unified (in a first time : again, high-kingship didn't looked much as a really united structure) Britto-Roman kingdom.


Do you think it's plausible enough?

EDIT : @Cuāuhtemōc
I'm not too sure about Coel Hen, we know even less about him than Ambrosius Aurelianus in matter of separating legend from plausible facts. However, if his dominion is to be maintained in a form of a high-kingship : do you think about a Northern Briton entity or an entiere insular one?
I must admit that, giving the weak romanisation of Northern Britain (compared to South-Eastern one), I would rather see the first, with two distinct post-Imperial Briton ensemble, but I could be convinced otherwise.
 
Last edited:
Some times ago, I posted this possibility about a Romano-British ensemble.

We know that they were unifying commands (I'd tend to argue they were more regional and circonstantial than pan-Briton : as Vortigern for the Cantium), at least military-wise : Riothamus/Ambrosius Aurelianus (possibly the same person) is an exemple. So the problem isn't having unifying features, but to make them last against the various and conflicting identities.

It doesn't seem, for instance, that the Old North kingdoms had a much develloped sense of commonity, for all we know.

Now, I think it's possible to have a maintained high-kingship (pretty much as in Ireland, Wales or Scotland) in some regions. Giving the not that much unified Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, it does have a chance to lives on and leading to a wanked *Wales. I don't know enough to definitely name a candidate or a most likely place (while I think that you can forget about North Sea regions); but the bonus point is that you don't even need a Britton or being totally hostile to Germans to have such.

Cerdic of Wessex may be the most obvious exemple of a mix of Britto-Romans and Barbarian elements in the Vth century (you have other ones). It wouldn't surprise me if you could have a Britto-Roman high-king, supported by the Saxons of the Litus managing to lead a more or less unified (in a first time : again, high-kingship didn't looked much as a really united structure) Britto-Roman kingdom.

Do you think it's plausible enough?
Yes, I agree here that HighKingship is more likely than Emperorship, and if longer lasting commands were in place then they would tend towards that.
EDIT : @Cuāuhtemōc
I'm not too sure about Coel Hen, we know even less about him than Ambrosius Aurelianus in matter of separating legend from plausible facts. However, if his dominion is to be maintained in a form of a high-kingship : do you think about a Northern Briton entity or an entiere insular one?
I must admit that, giving the weak romanisation of Northern Britain (compared to South-Eastern one), I would rather see the first, with two distinct post-Imperial Briton ensemble, but I could be convinced otherwise.
I often think that if Angle, Saxon, et alia, settlement was limited to the east vs OTL (especially with a reduced/absent melting pot of Mercia) then you'd get a "Devon-Cornwall" entity and a "Cumbrian" entity (centered on Deva/Chester). Perhaps with Irish/Scots in "Pembroke-Cardigan"
The "Cumberwelsh" being your Northern Briton entity.
 
Top