Roman Empire possibly never splits E-W

Not really. There were few attempted usurpations from local governors in the 4th century and up until the latter half of the 5th century when the empire had lost all control of its borders outside of Italy.

Not governors, military commanders who seemed never to get tired of trying to win the purple by rebelling.
 
Not governors, military commanders who seemed never to get tired of trying to win the purple by rebelling.

Again, this didn't happen much in the 4th or 5th centuries. The only real times I can think of is when the Tetrarchy collapsed (and even then, the main characters were from the imperial family) and Magnus Maximus' revolt.

Arbogast didn't revolt as much as Theodosius refused to believe Valentinian had hung himself (which he in all likelihood did) and invaded his territory.

Other than that, even after the death of Valens in battle, there was no civil war. In the pre-dominate empire, there would have almost certainly been one.
 
Again, this didn't happen much in the 4th or 5th centuries. The only real times I can think of is when the Tetrarchy collapsed (and even then, the main characters were from the imperial family) and Magnus Maximus' revolt.

Arbogast didn't revolt as much as Theodosius refused to believe Valentinian had hung himself (which he in all likelihood did) and invaded his territory.

Other than that, even after the death of Valens in battle, there was no civil war. In the pre-dominate empire, there would have almost certainly been one.

It was happening earlier though.
 
Perhaps a large-scale reform that proto-federalizes the empire could prevent the split. Also developments in naval technology, the mediterranean was a huge asset in reacting to threats.
 
Top