Sociopolitical and Cultural progress if Roman Empire survives

General Zod

Banned
I like the idea of the Scandinavians "pulling a fast one" on the Romans by colonizing much of North America before the Romans realize its value.

Instead of some poor, primitive bumpkins to the North who aren't worth the effort to conquer, the Scandinavians become the Empire of the North Atlantic, combining their own warrior culture wth political institutions borrowed from Rome.

After all, if their population grows per OTL but moving south will get them curbstomped, where to go?

About India, perhaps nomadic tribes fleeing Roman expansion into Central Asia unite India? The Mughals, who ruled most of the Subcontinent for centuries in OTL, were originally Mongol-ish by way of Afghanistan.

About these butterfly ideas, I would say:

Foreign-driven unification of India, which would make it able to resist Roman conquest of the Indian subcontinent: not terribly likely, but definitely possible. Not in the terms you describe, however. The most likely pattern of expansion for Rome would include conquest and assimilation of Western Sarmatia and Persia, then Eastern Sarmatia and India, then Central Asia, according to strategic and economic priorities. In other words, Rome would bother to make serious inroads in Central Asia after it has conquered India, or repeatedly failed to, not before. It is however possible (not terribly likely, but definitely possible) that a group of Iranian/Scythian refugees fleeing Roman expansion into Persia or Eastern Sarmatia could end up in India and be the catalyst for its unification in time to resist Roman expansion.

Scandinavian settlers snatching control of North America from Rome: about this I am terribly skeptical. Not altogether impossible, but it would require a massive alignment of favorable PoDs bordering ASB in unplausibility.

The Norse settlers shall never be able to colonize much of North America before Rome knows the high value of the area and moves it near the top of its expansion priorities. It is not necessary for Roman explorers to reach Central America before they get highly interested in American colonization: they just have to get past Greenland and give a serious look to Northeastern North America. Remember, by this time they have had several centuries of experience in colonizing and developing Northern and Eastern Europe and they have turned into another highly valued demographic and economic core of their Empire, in addition to Southern Europe and the Middle East. The Northeast shall look like Northern Europe to their eyes. They shall swamp the tiny Norse Colonies in legions and well-armed Roman colonists well before they manage to get entrenched in the continent.

Now, it is theoretically possible that Norse settlers or much more likely separatist Roman settlers may pull a successful ARW on the Roman Empire if all factors align in their favor (massive Chinese/Japanese/Indian support, Rome being seriously distracted by severe problems in other areas) but I would not hold my breath for it.

ITTL, a successful ARW is made highly unplausible by a series of factors: Differently from Britain or Spain, Rome can pull on the whole resource pool of a continent and half, the whole militaristic Roman Empire state machine is geared for conquest, defending its borders, and quelling rebellions in fringe provinces.

Last but not least at this point in its history Rome has not many other just as valuable areas to expand into, besides the Americas: India is either Roman or grown too tough to conquer, China is the rival imperial superpower, just as tough and mighty and developed as Rome itself, serious inroads in Subsaharian Africa are largely off-limits until modern medicine, Central Asia is somewhat valuable but nowhere as much as the Americas and possibly contested with China/India, South East Asia and Australia are very likely highly contested with China/India/Japan.

The only likely serious contenders for North America are the other Asian great powers, China and Japan, and most likely their possible but not certain penetration doesw not get any further than the Rokies for various reasons (Rome would draw from a larger resource pool in Eurasia, would have an easier route for exploration and colonization, and the Roman culture and state machine is better geared for such endeavors).
 
Last edited:

General Zod

Banned
Just my little contribution to this thread.



...........................................................................................
The Year 2612 Ab Urbe Conditia/ 1859 BCE.

The passenger train travelling along the Via Orientalis, the great railroad between the Imperium Romanorum and China, shook violently, causing his grace, and the official Imperial Envoy of China, Gong Yao Zedong, to awake from his slumber on the leather-bound couch. Zedong's papers were strewn messily across the small table below the couch. His personal assistant, a young man called Yuen Chao, was still fast asleep on the opposite couch, despite the jolt. It had been perhaps twelve days since the Gong Yao Zedong and his diplomatic delegation were sent by the Son of Heaven to discuss with the Romans on the official Partition of the continent of Australis in the South Seas.

The train transporting the Imperial Chinese delegation had made stops at the terminals in Wuhan, Lanzhou, and Lhasa. Then the journey continued past Kathmandu in the Himalayas, the city of Lakhanpuri, and approached through to Roman territory at Alexandria-on-the-Indus. The journey carried on through the Roman cities of Alexandria Arachosia, Persepolis, Seleucia, and just yesterday, Edessa. Once the come upon the city of Antioch, they would first oblige a visit on the Roman Proconsul of Syria, before mounting a steamship for Rome.

Zedong left his passenger cabin to find if the carriage's water closet was empty. Passing by the other private cabins was the Conductor of the train. Zedong stopped the man and enquired in Latin how it would take before the reached the station in Antioch.

"I expect that we should be at the Imperial Antioch Terminal within ten hours, sir," replied the Conductor, who was a thin Syrian-Greek of some forty years of age. Zedong thanked him for the estimate, and went into the carraige's latrine.

Yao Zedong returned to his cabin fifteen minutes later, and roused Yuen Chao from his rest.

"Chao. Wake up," he told the younger man. "We'll be in Antioch within less than a day." Chao sleepily opened his eyes. "Chao, I need your help to rehearse for when we meet the Governor of Syria."

Chao arose from the couch. "Of course, my lord," he replied dutifully.
....................................................................................................


Very nice and appropriate vignette. L.A. Thanks for your contribution. This gives me the opportunity to remark that this TTL shall see a high level of linguistic (and much later, popular culture) unification: pretty much all educated people in the world shall know one of, or more likely after modern universal education kicks in, both of the global languages: Latin and Mandarin. Both imperial languages would have countless regional variants and dialects, but yet, all educated people in the world should be mutually intellegible.
 
About Rome and Central Asia, Persia was always getting invaded from the north by various nomads (like the White Huns), so the Roman conquerors of Persia might have to deal with them before they can start moving into India. They decide to stamp out the nomad threat forever and focus their conquering efforts there, buying India time to unify and driving potential Mughals into the subcontinent.

Bonus points if you can have an Indian Teutoberger Wald--the overconfident Romans, fresh from conquering Persia, try to conquer India, only to have a major horse-nomad incursion into their rear that threatens their supply lines. Some Roman forces are pulled back and are squished by the nomads; other, more forward-deployed units, are squished by Indians.

If the nomads from this scenario are driven into India later, they've got some anti-Roman street cred that could help them unite India against the Romans.

About the Scandinavians, when would the population increases that caused the Viking Age in OTL come into effect in Scandinavia if Germany is Roman? If it comes early enough, the Romans are still busy with Persia and Sarmatia and by the time they start realizing the significance of North America, it would be too late.

In any event, they don't have to claim ALL of North America, just a big enough chunk to make them a significant state and not Mexico or Panama to the Roman US. OTL eastern Canada, for example.

Even if you don't like a Scandinavian Empire from Murmansk to the Great Lakes, here's an idea:

Huge numbers of Scandinavians settle in North America. The Romans, realizing how dangerous a possible Empire of the North Atlantic could be, invade and conquer Scandinavia.

The colonists in North America could defeat the Roman attempts to conquer them and swear to reclaim their homelands. Greenland and Iceland could go back and forth in a century of wars similar to OTL's Byzantine-Persian and Byzantine-Arab wars.
 

General Zod

Banned
About Rome and Central Asia, Persia was always getting invaded from the north by various nomads (like the White Huns), so the Roman conquerors of Persia might have to deal with them before they can start moving into India. They decide to stamp out the nomad threat forever and focus their conquering efforts there, buying
India time to unify and driving potential Mughals into the subcontinent.

Rather unlikely that the Romans would take this course. It would distract Romans from their true strategic objective, India, plus it would stretch their supply lines greately if it occurs before they have consolidated their control of Eastern Sarmatia and the Volga line, which would occur much at the same time as encorachment into India.

Bonus points if you can have an Indian Teutoberger Wald--the overconfident Romans, fresh from conquering Persia, try to conquer India, only to have a major horse-nomad incursion into their rear that threatens their supply lines. Some Roman forces are pulled back and are squished by the nomads; other, more forward-deployed units, are squished
by Indians.

Hmm, this is already rather more plausible. But it does not need involve nomads at all, in the force that eventually unifies India. You may have a talented dynasty from some Indian state, which emerges from this confrontation, and earns enough prestige to develop a momentum as the unifiers of India against the Romans. Again, not a sure thing, and widely dependent on butterflies (much as the original teutoburg affair) but it might definitely happen.

About the Scandinavians, when would the population increases that caused the Viking Age in OTL come into effect in Scandinavia if Germany is Roman? If it comes early enough, the Romans are still busy with Persia and Sarmatia and by the time they start realizing the significance of North America, it would be too late.

Hmm, I'm not sure what the butterfly effects would be of a Roman Germania and Sarmatia were, on the time schedule of the population increase in Scandinavia that caused the Viking Age in OTL. But unless it is rather drastically accelerated, it is quite unprobable IMO that they would buy the Scandinavians the window of centuries that would allow them to colonize North America without Roman interference and build settler states strong enough to resist Roman onslaught.

Since a strong and prosperous Roman Empire would in all likelihood adopt the Norse ocean-going techniques (and they would also adopt ocean-worthy shipping from a different source, India) within a century or so from the start of the Viking expansion, and follow the Norse explorers and settlers in the Iceland-Greenland-Vinland route in realatively early "hot pursuit", so to speak.

Let's see a TL:

1st Century CE: The Roman Empire conquers Germania, Bohemia, Dacia, Nubia, Britannia-Caledonia, and Hibernia. Romanization of Northern Europe starts in earnest as the conquests spurs the discovery of various technological improvements (heavy plough, three-field system, horse collar) which allow extrensive development of Northern Europe.

2nd Century CE: The Roman Empire conquers Mesopotamia and vassalizes Persia. Western Sarmatia is conquered, and Romanization of Eastern Europe starts. Heavy settlement of Northern Europe is ongoing.

It is a time of rapid technological progress as various key discoveries are adopted from improved contact with Persia, India, and China (papermaking, blast furnace & cast iron, seed drill, hand crank, crossbow, woodblock printing) or independently developed (wheelbarrow, abacus, caliper, waterwheel & watermill, solid-treed saddle & stirrups, iron horseshoes, cranes). Renovation and expansion of the Suez canal.

3rd Century CE: A time of crisis in the Roman Empire as civil wars and plague strike the Empire. However, the expanded borders and technological improvements the Empire has achieved prevent the Crisis from causing irreversible economic and social damage that would have occurred in their absence.

Extensive reforms are applied to deal with the causes and effects of the Crisis which stabilize the Empire in the long term: a professional scholar bureaucracy is created on the Chinese model, the Vigiles are given more powers and numbers to create a counterweight to the Pretorian Gurad (and viceversa), economic reforms give tax breaks to yeoman farmers and lift restrictions to finance and commerce, strengthening the urban proprietary trading class, while taxing the landed aristocracy more heavily. The Senate's membership is broadened to give representation to landed and urban trading elites from throughout the Empire.

The Army is restructured to create a mobile force, and soldiers' pay is tied to the rate of inflation, stabilising the income of the soldiers and making them less susceptible to bribery from ambitious commanders, whilst attracting a higher standard of recruit. Veterans are guaranteed liveable land grants in the provinces when they discharge. A system of strong property rights with lease and usufruct contracts for land development akin to sharecropping is created. Reform of land ownership combines the recognition of private ownership and the rewarding of cultivators with a harvest share commensurate with their efforts.

4th Century: A revitalized Roman Empire begins a new cycle of expansion and rapid technological progress (innovations include mobile type printing, artesian wells, grindstones, horizontal loom, distillation, wine press, soap, water hammer, arched saddle, longbow, spurs): Eastern Sarmatia is conquered and Persia is annexed to the Empire for good.

An extensive canal system in Northern Europe that links the Rhine, Weser, Elbe, Oder, and Vistula and is later expanded to the Nemen, Daugava, and Dneipr. The same way, they link the Danube, Dneister, and Dneipr. Other canals link the Rhine with the Danube, the Elbe and the Oder with the Danube, and the Vistula with the Dneister. The canal system is also extended westward, too, linking the Rhine, Scheldt, Meuse, Seine, Loire, Rhone, Saone, and Garonne rivers.

Renewed confidence of the Roman people in their society results into revitalization of European polytheism: various polytheistic traditions (esp. Greco-Roman, Celtic, Germanic, Slav, and Egyptian) from throughout the Empire are merged into an universal "Romanist" system and hierarchy, which also borrows ideas from Roman philosophy, Buddhism, and Hinduism. The doctrine develops that an universal immanent divine force exists, which creates fate and natural law, and the various gods are self-aware universal archetypal expressions of natural law, wearing different faces and names in different cultures, who can partially affect fate and natural law in their field of responsiblity. Middle Eastern mystery cults (such as Christianity and Mithraism) begin to lose influence and die out. A system of unitary procedure and law, with recognised authorities to provide legal opinion and formalised educational institutions for practitioners, is developed.

5th Century: Various groups of Central Asian nomads unify in the Huns confederation and make a massive breakout in Eastern Europe. They are eventually repelled by the Roman legions, using intentional and disciplined combined arms tactics between heavy cavalry and archers. This results in gradual unsystematic Roman expansion in Central Asia. Repeated Persian uprisings are suppressed and ruthless Romanization of Persia is enforced. Persecution and suppression of Middle Eastern monotheistic religions (Christianity, Mithraism, Zoroastrism), which are seen as hostile to Roman civilization. Romanist religion spreads to become the faith of the overwhelming majority of the Roman Empire's population. Invasion and conquest of Arabia. Weirs and Dams are built on the Tigris and Euphrates allowing irrigation canals and subterranean Aqueducts to farm in the desert.

Technological progress steadily continues: buttons, mirrors, rat traps, spectacles, windmills, tidal mills, spinning wheels, magnets, compass, counterweight trebuchets, astrolabes, rib vault, coffee, hang glider, hard soap, shampoo, nitric acid, alembic, valve, reciprocating, combination lock, quilting, pointed arch, surgical catgut are developed.

Legal reforms create increasingly complex financial instruments in trade, banking and investment, including limited liability and full legal personage, and different legal systems for slavery: 'house' slaves become trusted retainers who act as commercial agents, estate administrators and other vital functionaries, perform paramilitary functions, provide skilled labour and ultimately form a stratum of 'ministerial' upper class while 'chattel' slaves remain a labour reserve or luxury consumption good (ever more costly, but ultimately disposable). A toned-down form of temporary "house slavery" is developed to provide apprenticeship: A houseborn slave (verna) shows promise in youth and is trained, either in-house or by being lent or sold to someone who has use for him (trade in gifted children is brisk). Once he has the required skills (as an accountant, merchant, administrator, physician, artisan or whatever), he works for the profit of his owner. These people only change hands rarely, and if they do it is for large sums. Traditionally, after ten to fifteen years of service (in comfortable quarters and nice conditions, with some informal pay), they are granted their freedom and continue to work for their masters, now for pay. Some may strike out on their own, though they are still bound to them by legal ties (may not compete with them or act against their interests). Many former owners will provide seed capital for their freedmen. Free-born but poor children join this system by temporary slavery contracts that provide legally-enforceable guarantees of liberation after a fixed term of service and some basic personal rights for the temporary slave.

The "Roman Agricultural Revolution" starts. Roman traders and explorers travel across most of the Old World, and establish an early global economy across most of Asia and Africa and all of Europe, with their trade networks extending from the Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea in the west to the Indian Ocean and China Sea in the east. The global economy established by Roman traders across the Old World, enable the diffusion of many crops and farming techniques among different parts of the Roman world, as well as the adaptation of crops and techniques from and to regions beyond the Roman world. Crops from Africa such as sorghum, crops from China such as citrus fruits, and numerous crops from India such as mangos, rice, cotton and sugar cane, are distributed throughout Roman lands, which previously had not grown these crops. Romans start developing a scientific approach to agriculture based on three major elements: sophisticated systems of crop rotation, where land is cropped four or more times in a two-year period, highly developed irrigation techniques, using machines such as norias, water mills, water raising machines, dams and reservoirs, which allow to greatly expand the exploitable land area, and the introduction of a large variety of crops which are studied and catalogued according to the season, type of land and amount of water they require. Manufacture of silk spreads in the Roman Empire.

6th Century: Continued conquests of territory into Central Asia. Persia subsides into an uneasy peace. Expansion through Persian territory into India. Lenghty wars to secure it. Merging of Romanist and Hinduist religions. The Kingdom of Aksum is invaded and conquered by Rome. Plague hits again the Empire, delaying expansion in Asia but its effects are diminished by the effectiveness of the Roman public health system and Roman culture's focus on personal hygiene. The plague spurs interest into medicine and natural philosophy in Roman culture.

Technological progress continues, with the development of the hourglass, mechanical clocks, flywheel, crankshaft, connecting rod, and water turbine, many numerous innovative industrial uses of water mills, early industrial uses of tidal power, wind power, and fossil fuels such as petroleum, and the earliest large factory complexes. A variety of industrial mills are invented in the Roman world, including fulling mills, gristmills, hullers, paper mills, sawmills, shipmills, stamp mills, steel mills, sugar mills, tide mills, and windmills. Roman engineers also invent crankshafts and water turbines, first employ gears in mills and water-raising machines, and pioneer the use of dams as a source of water power, used to provide additional power to watermills and water-raising machines.

Many industries are generated due to the Roman Agricultural Revolution, including the earliest industries for agribusiness, astronomical instruments, ceramics, chemicals, distillation technologies, clocks, glass, mechanical hydropowered and wind powered machinery, matting, mosaics, pulp and paper industry, perfumery, petroleum, pharmaceuticals, rope-making, shipping, shipbuilding, silk, sugar, textiles, weapons, and the mining of minerals such as sulfur, ammonia, lead and iron. The first large factory complexes are built for many of these industries. The Roman domestic water system is perfected, with a widespread network of sewers, public baths, drinking fountains, piped drinking water supplies, and widespread private and public toilet and bathing facilities.

Two types of economic systems take root in the Roman world: politically-driven investment by the government bureaucracy and military, which prompt agricultural development and colonization of under-exploited lands, typically combined with the settlement of veterans and colonists, in state colonies and individual land grants in the provinces, building and extension of the road network, the canal network in Europe and the irrigation system in the Middle East, the establishment of an extensive postal system, and the settlement of veterans in state colonies and individual land grants in the provinces; and market-driven agricultural development, involving the spread of advice, education, and free seeds, and the introduction of high value crops or animals to areas where they were previously unknown, the development of an extensive international trade network, and widespread manufacturing. The first market economy and earliest forms of merchant capitalism take root and a vigorous monetary economy was created on the basis of the expanding levels of circulation of a stable high-value currency (the denarius). Innovative new business techniques and forms of business organisation are introduced by economists, merchants and traders during this time. Such innovations include the earliest trading companies, big businesses, contracts, bills of exchange, long-distance international trade, the first forms of limited partnerships, the issuing of insurance, and the earliest forms of credit, debt, profit, loss, capital, capital accumulation, circulating capital, capital expenditure, revenue, cheques, promissory notes, trusts and charitable trusts, startup companies, savings accounts, transactional accounts, pawning, loaning, exchange rates, bankers, money changers, ledgers, deposits, assignments, the double-entry bookkeeping system, and lawsuits.

Formalized educational institutions for legal practitioners begin to transform into a full-fledged university system as they start to provide formalized education and academic degrees into law, medicine, Romanist theology, liberal arts, and natural philosophy. Their curriculum includes grammar, logic, rhetoric, geometry, arithmetic, astronomy, music, architecture, accounting, Romanist theology, medicine, natural philosophy, and Roman law.

7th Century: The Empire gradually recovers from the effects of the plague. Repeated uprisings and rebellions in Ethiopia and India, unsuccessful attempted expansion into Sina, and the first major civil war in the Roman Empire since the 3rd Century Crisis keep the Roman military fully occupied.

Plagues and civil wars somewhat slow down the pace of technological progress, but the country still sees the development of the cross-staff, mariner's astrolabe, stern-mounted rudder, arch bridge, steel crossbow, oil paint, and several improvements in shipbuilding.

The university system spreads throughout the Empire, spurring a heightened empiric interest into logic, mathematics, natural philosophy, and medicine: notable scientific advances of the 6th and 7th centuries include the development of a decimal place value number system and the zero, systematization of arithmetic and algebra, solution of linear and quadratic equations, and those polynomials of higher degree that could be reduced to quadratics through substitution, first developments in differential calculus, the theory of impetus, the first integrated systematization of optics, the development of chemistry, rediscovery of atomism, advances in trigonometry with the definition of the sine and cosine, secant, cosecant, tangent and cotangent, advances in surgery with the standardization of surgical instruments, the development of a mathematical scale to quantify the strength of drugs, and a system that would allow a doctor to determine in advance the most critical days of a patient's illness, the introduction of systematic experimentation and quantification into the study of physiology, the discovery of the contagious nature of infectious diseases, the introduction of quarantine to limit the spread of contagious diseases, and the introduction of experimental medicine and clinical trials.

Mahayana Buddhism spreads to the Roman Empire.
 
This is starting to seriously look like Romanowank, if you follow that pattern. Rome would control Ireland to Burma (!) in this situation.
 
There may not be a Scandinavian Empire as such, but there may occur a series of Norse diasporas colonising places between America and the Sarmation lands. Definately for the Romans, the resident Norse within their empire maybe well compose part of some sort of special merchant-explorer class in their society, along with the Greeks, Jews, Arabs, Berbers, and even Steppe peoples.

The first and initially independent Norse settlements in America may start inviting Romans as well as other Norse to bulk up the numbers for safety, as well as provide them access to certain types of industry as yet absent in the colonies. I imagine many of these pre-Roman occupation Norse colonies will take on the character of certain historical mercantile republics, like Novgorod for example. And by the time the colonial societies begin entering the St Lawrence and Mississipi Rivers to trade with the peoples there, it may be around this time that the weathered and mighty Roman Empire begins to establish it's hegemony among the American colonies
 
Very nice and appropriate vignette. L.A. Thanks for your contribution. This gives me the opportunity to remark that this TTL shall see a high level of linguistic (and much later, popular culture) unification: pretty much all educated people in the world shall know one of, or more likely after modern universal education kicks in, both of the global languages: Latin and Mandarin. Both imperial languages would have countless regional variants and dialects, but yet, all educated people in the world should be mutually intellegible.

I don't think that is terribly plausible. Latin was not a universal language even within the Roman Empire, and there was no unilingualism policy. I think what we are more likely to see is a pattern or local languages of diminishing importance, regionally dominant trade anbd/or governance languages, and prestige languages that are spoken by the educated upper classes. This kind of thing is fairly typical of most ancient and medieval Empires and still obtains in e.g. East Africa, India, parts of South America, and large parts of the Middle East. The typical urban inhabitant of the ancient and medieval world is multilingual by necessity (as are most people on earth still). There is no indication that this pattern would ever change without a massive, deliberate government effort, and I can't see the Romans doing it.

My prediction would be:

Western and Northern Europe is Latin-dominated with surviving Germanic, Celtic and Finno-Ugric local languages and pockets of Aramaic and Greek. Your typical villager speaks his native language plus some basic Latin. Mobile populations (legionary colonists, traders, artisans, homesteaders) speak Latin as their first language and only have basic proficiency in the local language. Many of them are also proficient in Greek either for professional or prestige reasons.

Southeastern Europe and the Levant are dominated primarily by Koine Greek, with only the upper class learning Latin for prestige reasons. Most Latin-speakers in the Med are bilingual in Greek to some extent as it is the primary language of literature, technology and science. Egypt is home to a large superregional Coptic language community and in Syria, Palestine and Mesopotamia, Aramaic dialects fulfil the same function. They are displacing local languages in many areas. Most speakers of these languages get along fine regionally without Greek, though it remains the prestige language to learn if you have social ambitions. Only those aiming for a career in the higher reaches of the military or government (and thus need to study law or command legionaries) need to study Latin. Latin is the language of legislation and senior government, but not of local government or court proceedings. Those are managed in Greek. Arabic is the lingua franca of the Red Sea and the Arabian peninsula, but not spoken much beyond.

Persia and India are dominated by their respective literary languages, Aramaic and Sanskrit, but local languages retain much greater importance. Roman power is mainly exercised through Greek-speaking mediators. All senior Roman administrators speak Greek. There is a good chance that some South Indian languages will spread through much of the Indian Ocean basin early and establish themselves as the lingua franca of choice.

East of India, the Sinosphere begins. Ditto here - classical Chinese as the prestige and government language, Chinese patois as trade language, regional literary languages among the urban classes, local languages among the peasant population.

West Africa will probably eventually grow to use Latin as the lingua franca, akin to Swahili in East Africa today, but not as the main language.
 
I think you are being overoptimistic.

Let's see a TL:

1st Century CE: The Roman Empire conquers Germania, Bohemia, Dacia, Nubia, Britannia-Caledonia, and Hibernia. Romanization of Northern Europe starts in earnest as the conquests spurs the discovery of various technological improvements (heavy plough, three-field system, horse collar) which allow extrensive development of Northern Europe.

IOTL the opening of Northeastern Europe took several centuries. That being from a base of much denser population in France and the Rhineland. I am also doubtful that the Roman military can effectively take control of so much additional territory. Roman government OTL had trouble taking hold in underdeveloped areas, and military conquest was mostly undertaken as a central government effort, so it was rarer. It is not impossible, but hard to see.

2nd Century CE: The Roman Empire conquers Mesopotamia and vassalizes Persia. Western Sarmatia is conquered, and Romanization of Eastern Europe starts. Heavy settlement of Northern Europe is ongoing.

It is a time of rapid technological progress as various key discoveries are adopted from improved contact with Persia, India, and China (papermaking, blast furnace & cast iron, seed drill, hand crank, crossbow, woodblock printing) or independently developed (wheelbarrow, abacus, caliper, waterwheel & watermill, solid-treed saddle & stirrups, iron horseshoes, cranes). Renovation and expansion of the Suez canal.

Again, I think your estimate of technological progress is far too generous. Victory over Parthia is not out of the question, but Eastern Europe at this point is overreaching IMO. A century is not enough to build the required population base along the Rhine and Danube.

3rd Century CE: A time of crisis in the Roman Empire as civil wars and plague strike the Empire. However, the expanded borders and technological improvements the Empire has achieved prevent the Crisis from causing irreversible economic and social damage that would have occurred in their absence.

Wouldn't the greater territorial and economic expansion already have altered political patterns? The core elements of the third-century crisis are political instability, military reverses especially at the hands of the Sassanids, and underfunding of the government's new and expanded mandate. Much of this you won't have. The plague and climatic phenomena are still there, but you should have largely precluded the rest.

Extensive reforms are applied to deal with the causes and effects of the Crisis which stabilize the Empire in the long term: a professional scholar bureaucracy is created on the Chinese model

Oy, that's going to make the army unhappy. Why not follow OTL's model and use the military administrative arm as your civil service? They're already doing the job.

the Vigiles are given more powers and numbers to create a counterweight to the Pretorian Gurad (and viceversa),

I would rather suggest either a new military presence in Italy (like III Parthica) or beefing up the naval garrison. the vigiles are about the lowest-status force you can find and would work better as a model for a gendarmerie than a political player. Which, incidentally, you could have happen - give more cities their own vigiles.

economic reforms give tax breaks to yeoman farmers and lift restrictions to finance and commerce, strengthening the urban proprietary trading class, while taxing the landed aristocracy more heavily. The Senate's membership is broadened to give representation to landed and urban trading elites from throughout the Empire.

This, I'm afraid, is fairly implausible. It wopuld require a powerful emperor through a long reign enforcing something that he knows to be right against heavy resistance. The question is, how does he know? There is no way he can have internalised a model of government he doesn't know. I would rather suggest a gradual movement away from landholding as the central source of revenue (maybe because of a tax reform that uses property title as the assessment basis or large-scale veteran settlements on expropriated estates) towards industry and trade as a 'secondary' source. E.g. pottery and brickmaking, mining, quarrying and forerstry were considered respectable because they used 'the land', like agriculture. You could have this expanded into factory tanneries, textile manufacture, pottery workshops and such as part of the landed estate, and trade as part of the sales and raw materials purchasing channels. That way, you get indistrial and trade interest in without having to overthrow the entire imaginary of government.

[/QUOTE]
The Army is restructured to create a mobile force, and soldiers' pay is tied to the rate of inflation, stabilising the income of the soldiers and making them less susceptible to bribery from ambitious commanders, whilst attracting a higher standard of recruit. Veterans are guaranteed liveable land grants in the provinces when they discharge.
[/QUOTE]

That was pretty much done anyway. Though the Romans really didn't understand the concept of inflation - they paiod their soldiers in gold. Same effect. Without the massive expansion of the forces necessary to defeat the military threats from outside, you can probably simply retain the old system and make it more flexible.


An extensive canal system in Northern Europe that links the Rhine, Weser, Elbe, Oder, and Vistula and is later expanded to the Nemen, Daugava, and Dneipr. The same way, they link the Danube, Dneister, and Dneipr. Other canals link the Rhine with the Danube, the Elbe and the Oder with the Danube, and the Vistula with the Dneister. The canal system is also extended westward, too, linking the Rhine, Scheldt, Meuse, Seine, Loire, Rhone, Saone, and Garonne rivers.

I think this is more likely to go the other way around. The Romans don't plan from maps - their building projects follow demand. Also, again, more time is required IMO. Have the efforts start in the first century and gradually prove to be effective. Inventing the lock also would help.

Repeated Persian uprisings are suppressed and ruthless Romanization of Persia is enforced. Persecution and suppression of Middle Eastern monotheistic religions (Christianity, Mithraism, Zoroastrism), which are seen as hostile to Roman civilization. Romanist religion spreads to become the faith of the overwhelming majority of the Roman Empire's population. Invasion and conquest of Arabia. Weirs and Dams are built on the Tigris and Euphrates allowing irrigation canals and subterranean Aqueducts to farm in the desert.

I can't quite see this. Religious persecution is a bad system if you want to control territory, and Romanisation isn't something the Romans ever consciously tried against a civilised enemy. Also, by this time the Romans should already practically own Arabia. And I doubt they have anything to teach the Mesopotamians abour irrigation - that is where they learned their technology.

Technological progress steadily continues: buttons, mirrors, rat traps, spectacles, windmills, tidal mills, spinning wheels, magnets, compass, counterweight trebuchets, astrolabes, rib vault, coffee, hang glider, hard soap, shampoo, nitric acid, alembic, valve, reciprocating, combination lock, quilting, pointed arch, surgical catgut are developed.

Again, you're going too fast here. Roman technology is adequate to its purpose and will develop slowly unless there is some radical change in its needs.

Though I think some of the things you are putting here are actually earlier. They just took a long time to become established technology.

The "Roman Agricultural Revolution" starts. Roman traders and explorers travel across most of the Old World, and establish an early global economy across most of Asia and Africa and all of Europe, with their trade networks extending from the Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea in the west to the Indian Ocean and China Sea in the east. The global economy established by Roman traders across the Old World, enable the diffusion of many crops and farming techniques among different parts of the Roman world, as well as the adaptation of crops and techniques from and to regions beyond the Roman world. Crops from Africa such as sorghum, crops from China such as citrus fruits, and numerous crops from India such as mangos, rice, cotton and sugar cane, are distributed throughout Roman lands, which previously had not grown these crops. Romans start developing a scientific approach to agriculture based on three major elements: sophisticated systems of crop rotation, where land is cropped four or more times in a two-year period, highly developed irrigation techniques, using machines such as norias, water mills, water raising machines, dams and reservoirs, which allow to greatly expand the exploitable land area, and the introduction of a large variety of crops which are studied and catalogued according to the season, type of land and amount of water they require. Manufacture of silk spreads in the Roman Empire.

This one I like! But keep in mind that you will need rye. Without rye, you really can't open up the wild wastes of Europe.

6th Century: Continued conquests of territory into Central Asia. Persia subsides into an uneasy peace. Expansion through Persian territory into India. Lenghty wars to secure it. Merging of Romanist and Hinduist religions. The Kingdom of Aksum is invaded and conquered by Rome.
I think expansion into Africa would happen earlier in this TL.

Plague hits again the Empire, delaying expansion in Asia but its effects are diminished by the effectiveness of the Roman public health system and Roman culture's focus on personal hygiene. The plague spurs interest into medicine and natural philosophy in Roman culture.

Unfortunately, Roman public health and hygiene will do little to stop the plague. That connection is heavily overrated, largely due to Victorian influence.

Technological progress continues, with the development of the hourglass, mechanical clocks, flywheel, crankshaft, connecting rod, and water turbine, many numerous innovative industrial uses of water mills, early industrial uses of tidal power, wind power, and fossil fuels such as petroleum, and the earliest large factory complexes. A variety of industrial mills are invented in the Roman world, including fulling mills, gristmills, hullers, paper mills, sawmills, shipmills, stamp mills, steel mills, sugar mills, tide mills, and windmills. Roman engineers also invent crankshafts and water turbines, first employ gears in mills and water-raising machines, and pioneer the use of dams as a source of water power, used to provide additional power to watermills and water-raising machines.

Here, I think, you are late. These technologies are likely to emerge much earlier and spread slowly as they are expanded into new applications.



Two types of economic systems take root in the Roman world: politically-driven investment by the government bureaucracy and military, which prompt agricultural development and colonization of under-exploited lands, typically combined with the settlement of veterans and colonists, in state colonies and individual land grants in the provinces, building and extension of the road network, the canal network in Europe and the irrigation system in the Middle East, the establishment of an extensive postal system, and the settlement of veterans in state colonies and individual land grants in the provinces; and market-driven agricultural development, involving the spread of advice, education, and free seeds, and the introduction of high value crops or animals to areas where they were previously unknown, the development of an extensive international trade network, and widespread manufacturing. The first market economy and earliest forms of merchant capitalism take root and a vigorous monetary economy was created on the basis of the expanding levels of circulation of a stable high-value currency (the denarius). Innovative new business techniques and forms of business organisation are introduced by economists, merchants and traders during this time. Such innovations include the earliest trading companies, big businesses, contracts, bills of exchange, long-distance international trade, the first forms of limited partnerships, the issuing of insurance, and the earliest forms of credit, debt, profit, loss, capital, capital accumulation, circulating capital, capital expenditure, revenue, cheques, promissory notes, trusts and charitable trusts, startup companies, savings accounts, transactional accounts, pawning, loaning, exchange rates, bankers, money changers, ledgers, deposits, assignments, the double-entry bookkeeping system, and lawsuits.

This is likely to have a geographic diomension, too. Private enterprise and capital investment are more likely to be strong in the Greek-speaking East and Italy whereas in the frontier regions, the military is liable to play a much larger role in the command economy.

academic degrees into law, medicine, Romanist theology, liberal arts, and natural philosophy. Their curriculum includes grammar, logic, rhetoric, geometry, arithmetic, astronomy, music, architecture, accounting, Romanist theology, medicine, natural philosophy, and Roman law.

I can't see any kind of academic curriculum in theology. Maybe something like particular excellence in the Classics, but without a revealed corpus of texts, you can't really have the concept of studying the divinity.

Maybe if you introduced the study of fas in the legal curriculum? That would make you an expert in ritual and tradition. Sounds like the kind of thing the Romans would do.


I still think it is too much of a Romanwank, but I must say it's a lot more plausible than the usual Roma Aeterna.
 

General Zod

Banned
I don't think that is terribly plausible. Latin was not a universal language even within the Roman Empire, and there was no unilingualism policy. I think what we are more likely to see is a pattern or local languages of diminishing importance, regionally dominant trade anbd/or governance languages, and prestige languages that are spoken by the educated upper classes. This kind of thing is fairly typical of most ancient and medieval Empires and still obtains in e.g. East Africa, India, parts of South America, and large parts of the Middle East. The typical urban inhabitant of the ancient and medieval world is multilingual by necessity (as are most people on earth still). There is no indication that this pattern would ever change without a massive, deliberate government effort, and I can't see the Romans doing it.

My prediction would be:

Western and Northern Europe is Latin-dominated with surviving Germanic, Celtic and Finno-Ugric local languages and pockets of Aramaic and Greek. Your typical villager speaks his native language plus some basic Latin. Mobile populations (legionary colonists, traders, artisans, homesteaders) speak Latin as their first language and only have basic proficiency in the local language. Many of them are also proficient in Greek either for professional or prestige reasons.

Southeastern Europe and the Levant are dominated primarily by Koine Greek, with only the upper class learning Latin for prestige reasons. Most Latin-speakers in the Med are bilingual in Greek to some extent as it is the primary language of literature, technology and science. Egypt is home to a large superregional Coptic language community and in Syria, Palestine and Mesopotamia, Aramaic dialects fulfil the same function. They are displacing local languages in many areas. Most speakers of these languages get along fine regionally without Greek, though it remains the prestige language to learn if you have social ambitions. Only those aiming for a career in the higher reaches of the military or government (and thus need to study law or command legionaries) need to study Latin. Latin is the language of legislation and senior government, but not of local government or court proceedings. Those are managed in Greek. Arabic is the lingua franca of the Red Sea and the Arabian peninsula, but not spoken much beyond.

Persia and India are dominated by their respective literary languages, Aramaic and Sanskrit, but local languages retain much greater importance. Roman power is mainly exercised through Greek-speaking mediators. All senior Roman administrators speak Greek. There is a good chance that some South Indian languages will spread through much of the Indian Ocean basin early and establish themselves as the lingua franca of choice.

East of India, the Sinosphere begins. Ditto here - classical Chinese as the prestige and government language, Chinese patois as trade language, regional literary languages among the urban classes, local languages among the peasant population.

West Africa will probably eventually grow to use Latin as the lingua franca, akin to Swahili in East Africa today, but not as the main language.

Actually it seems it misexplained my point, sorry. :eek: I was referring to the situation in modern times, after modern education systems and mass media kick in. I fully agree that in pre-industrial times the linguistic situation would be pretty much the way you describe it. However, in modern times I would expect somewhat more linguistic homogeneization to develop. I would expect both Latin and Mandarin to become international lingua franca and being taught as second/third languages in public schools all over the world. It is quite possible that Greek, Sanskit, and Cantonese would reatain enough prestige and diffusion to maintain strong diffusion as supraregional lingua franca and/or literary languages. I am a bit more dubious about the continued strong diffusion of more localized regional languages like Coptic and Aramaic, but it's definitely possible. Same reasoning about the more widespread regional languages in the Sinasphere. I would expect the vast majority of local languages largely to die out both in the Romasphere and Sinasphere.
 
I'm inclined to believe that even with the Medieval agricultural advances, the Roman Empire was pretty close to its "natural" borders. There could be advances into Northern Europe Plains, with some wars against the more organized or motivated tribal groups in the area. But in the East, the Persian Empires (Parthian and then Sassanid) were organized, pretty strong, and a fair way for Roman supply trains to travel. With a heartland over the Zagros Mtns and a steady supply of steppe nomad peoples who can reinvorgate any defeated Persian empire I can easily see the OTL upper Euphrates border sticking. Fighting far away foreign wars with little to gain and lots to lose has been a non-starter for empires across continents and centuries.

With the Roman Empire having expanded into the Northern European Plain, you could also see situations where steppe nomads take control over pieces of the Roman Empire, and use that territory as staging grounds for further attacks on the rest of the Roman Empire. Similar to what China faced (also similar to the OTL Germanic settlements, also similiar to the Bulfar and Avar attacks on the Eastern Empire), you could see settled populations willing to aid outside forces in attacks on the center. The conquered Germanic tribes who make up the population of the Far German provinces could still end up allying with the Huns when they invade, with Germanic Legions and Hunnic horsemen going over the Alps to unseat an unworthy Emperor.

Also, the plagues that massively reduced Roman populations are still going to happen. So the Third Century Crisis doesn't lead to the end of the Empire, because the Empire's expansion has headed off any Germanics' Volkwundering, but the Alans and the Slavs are coming later, and if the OTL plague schedule is still on then there will ample area for these barbarians to move into. The Arabs are still going to emerge from the desert, and whether united behind a Abrahamic banner or not they will be able to wreck havoc on both ends of the Fertile Crescent. The Norse will still come out of the north, though with a stronger Empire you could see them funneled either East or West, forcing large contingents of Norse to settle Iceland/Greenland/Newfoundland/Nova Scotia and the Baltic-to-Black-Sea trade routes.

An expansion into the North German Plain means the Roman Empire could survive, but survival does not equal world conquest. Being able to survive a life-threatening disease does not mean that one becomes the picture of health. I think that a surviving Roman Empire would be more about identity than how the government function. Its about making people think of themselves as 'Romans' before anything else. Its about people looking back on their history and identifying it as the history of Rome, the same way that the Chinese can look back at their history and identify it as the history of China. To borrow from Huntington, the challenge is to have Rome be a civilization masquerading as a state.
 

mojojojo

Gone Fishin'
As it concerns the Native American or the Subsaharian cultures, it is quite possible that a couple of them might manage to escape annexation and/or vassalage by the imperial superpowers thanks to favorable circumstances (inospitale or resource-poor location, being placed as a useful buffer between two imperial spheres of influence) but I find it utterly unplausible that any of them could ever manage to pull a Meji of their own and make themselves a rival to the superpowers. They would have to overcome a cultural handicap far worse than the one India or Japan would face.
I think a horse nomad culture might well develop in NA as well as SA(just like it did in OLT) I think a Roman version of the Wild West could be quite interesting.
 

Terlot

Banned
I don't think there will be scientific progress as that experienced by OTL Europe in Reneissance. Big centralised states without much competition can hinder scientific progress. Rome would be big on large projects(canals, roads, agriculture) but I doubt it would develop similiar urge to explore and conquer as Europeans. Why should Rome sail to America if it has a safe route to India and China ? Even if it did-which isn't impossible I don't see Romans as doing much more then establishing trading outposts and perhaps some small colonies in Carribean. In OTL it took two centuries for serious colonisation to start and here I don't see that happening right away either.

Additionally this might prolong the Empire but as others noted, Slavs will come later. And the Mongols as well. And the plague. And the Arabs. So even if Rome lives longer, becomes more developed, eventuall it will collapse. Perhaps around 12-13th Century. It would be interesting if refugees from civil war and barbarian incursions will now go to New World where the people already know horses and are more developed then in OTL without being controlled by Europeans.

It is a depressing world though-the Dark Age would come, but as it will come later, then perhaps the human progress will be postponed as well.
Also if European efforts are dominated by one culture and attempts of centralisation then we might see similiar situation as in China with much slower progress.

Perhaps in this world American mix of Norse-Roma-Indian culture existing in OTL North American coast will become starting point of vibrant culture that will start-up human advancement.
 
I must repeat my criticism of "big empires equals stagnation" argument once more. If so, why was Song China as dynamic as Renaissance Italy? Why did America adopt mass production and the hallmarks of industrialization more quickly than Europe?
 

Terlot

Banned
Why did America adopt mass production and the hallmarks of industrialization more quickly than Europe?
America ? Or United States. A very decentralised country.

As for Song China being dynamic-perhaps, but why did it fail ?
 
America ? Or United States. A very decentralised country.

Was it? Interstate commerce, tariffs in relation to the rest of the world, foreign policy, etc. all controlled from Washington.

Anyway, that seems to be a bit silly. Saying that the US industrialized b/c of decentralization, when the opposite seems to be true, and then saying that the decentralized (and it could not be anything but) Roman Empire couldn't develop seems unfair.

As for Song China being dynamic-perhaps, but why did it fail ?

Steppe warriors will ruin anyone's day.
 
Other than the Mongol invasion setting back the Song Empire's progress, I think it lacked sufficient competition from abroad. Hence the reason for the proposed enhanced longevity for Roman Civilization. With two cultures like them thriving at the same time, it somewhat decreases the margin for cultural stagnation.
 

General Zod

Banned
I think you are being overoptimistic.

I definitely mean to be optimistic, as long as it's plausible. ;):p:D


IOTL the opening of Northeastern Europe took several centuries. That being from a base of much denser population in France and the Rhineland. I am also doubtful that the Roman military can effectively take control of so much additional territory. Roman government OTL had trouble taking hold in underdeveloped areas, and military conquest was mostly undertaken as a central government effort, so it was rarer. It is not impossible, but hard to see.

Ok, I'm going to delay the conquest and settlment of Eastern Europe a bit, in order to allow the settlment of Northern Europe. However, I do not think that complete conquest of Germania, Bohemia, and Dacia in a century is at all unplausible, since IOTL conquest of Dacia took a few decades. If the momentum for this conquest since the beginning of the 1st Century is unbroken, they have plenty of time in the first two centuries to absorb and begin to seriously develop the area. I would also point out that the vast majority of the Teuton natives would end replenishing the population of Romanized Germania, including the ones that IOTL emigrated to Western Europe during the Time of Migrations, it would not just be colonization from older Roman areas like Gallia.

Again, I think your estimate of technological progress is far too generous. Victory over Parthia is not out of the question, but Eastern Europe at this point is overreaching IMO. A century is not enough to build the required population base along the Rhine and Danube.

OK, I shall move conquest of Eastern Europe from the 2nd to the 4th Century, to give more time to build the population base in Northern Europe.

About the pace of technological progress, in this century I've combined a slightly more advanced development of technology the Romans already had, with the second lucky (but plausible) break of more efficient cultural transmission of stuff that the Chinese already owned. I suppose one could let the transmission happen a bit more slowly, over a couple centuries instead of one. But it's a PoD rather important to explian why the Empire survies the Crises of 3rd and 5th century successfully.

About the whole point of technological progress: Here I work on the assumption that if the Empire can survive and butterfly the Dark Ages away, and it has a cultural atmosphere not strongyl biased in favor of stagnation, it will naturally tread the path to the same technological progress that the Muslim world in tis Golden Age and Europe during the High and Late Middle Ages did IOTL. Since I'm unshakably persuaded that the idea that big centralized preindustrial empires are doomed to cultural stagnation, is frankly, utter crap. The history of China disproves it.

Oy, that's going to make the army unhappy. Why not follow OTL's model and use the military administrative arm as your civil service? They're already doing the job.

Good point. But the Empire needs to set up the professional bureaucracy as a separate corps from the military, precisely to make a counterbalance to military despotism (it worked fine for the Chinese and the Byzantine). Making the bureacucracy a subset of the military would defy the purpose of the exercise. And the bureaucracy would better be a secular one (even if "Romanism" is going to be nowhere as troublesome as the Christian Church). Religious bureaucracies sooner or later become agents of stagnation.

What about this ? The civil service buraucracy is still a separate corps from the military administrative arm, but either it shares competencies with it, or veterans from that branch of the military get privileged access to civil service jobs. Maybe better the lattr, it would work better with the "military industrial complex" structure of this Roman Empire's economy.

I would rather suggest either a new military presence in Italy (like III Parthica) or beefing up the naval garrison. the vigiles are about the lowest-status force you can find and would work better as a model for a gendarmerie than a political player. Which, incidentally, you could have happen - give more cities their own vigiles.

Both suggestions are fine.

I would rather suggest a gradual movement away from landholding as the central source of revenue (maybe because of a tax reform that uses property title as the assessment basis or large-scale veteran settlements on expropriated estates) towards industry and trade as a 'secondary' source. E.g. pottery and brickmaking, mining, quarrying and forerstry were considered respectable because they used 'the land', like agriculture. You could have this expanded into factory tanneries, textile manufacture, pottery workshops and such as part of the landed estate, and trade as part of the sales and raw materials purchasing channels. That way, you get indistrial and trade interest in without having to overthrow the entire imaginary of government.

This seems like a fine suggestion, even if I am not sure how to word the description of the tax reform you suggest. And I suppose some fairly significant expropriation of estates and veteran resettlment could occur. Could you kindly describe the tax reform you mentioned more in detail ?

That was pretty much done anyway. Though the Romans really didn't understand the concept of inflation - they paiod their soldiers in gold. Same effect. Without the massive expansion of the forces necessary to defeat the military threats from outside, you can probably simply retain the old system and make it more flexible.

Ok.

I think this is more likely to go the other way around. The Romans don't plan from maps - their building projects follow demand. Also, again, more time is required IMO. Have the efforts start in the first century and gradually prove to be effective. Inventing the lock also would help.

I welcome those suggestions.

I can't quite see this. Religious persecution is a bad system if you want to control territory, and Romanisation isn't something the Romans ever consciously tried against a civilised enemy. Also, by this time the Romans should already practically own Arabia. And I doubt they have anything to teach the Mesopotamians abour irrigation - that is where they learned their technology.

OK, on the latter points, then let's say I let gradually monotheistic relgions die out as they come to be seen as expressions of disloyalty.

Again, you're going too fast here. Roman technology is adequate to its purpose and will develop slowly unless there is some radical change in its needs.

Again, here I'm using the Muslim and European Middle Age technological development timetables. See my point above. If you butterfly the Dark Ages away, and give the Empire a reasonable degree of domestic stability and economic prosperity, there is no plausible reason why its technology should not progress as fast as the Caliphate or Christian Europe ones.

This one I like! But keep in mind that you will need rye. Without rye, you really can't open up the wild wastes of Europe.

Ok, but the crop list was not meant to be exaustive. I'll expand it.

I think expansion into Africa would happen earlier in this TL.

Ok.

Unfortunately, Roman public health and hygiene will do little to stop the plague. That connection is heavily overrated, largely due to Victorian influence.

I still think it ought to have some influence, but I'll take the issue into consideration, and make the plague hit at near-full severity.

Here, I think, you are late. These technologies are likely to emerge much earlier and spread slowly as they are expanded into new applications.

Yes for proto-industrial applications of water/tide/wind-power. Stuff like the hourglass and mechanical clocks, however, were fairly late in Middle Age technology in comparison to other stuff you said would come later.

I tried to put the various discoveries in the TL by roughly following the order they appeared in IOTL Middle Ages.

This is likely to have a geographic diomension, too. Private enterprise and capital investment are more likely to be strong in the Greek-speaking East and Italy whereas in the frontier regions, the military is liable to play a much larger role in the command economy.

Fully agreed. But I thought it was implied in the statement that the command economy focused in fairly big infrastructure and agricultural projects in the underdeveloped areas. It may be spelt more clearly.

I can't see any kind of academic curriculum in theology. Maybe something like particular excellence in the Classics, but without a revealed corpus of texts, you can't really have the concept of studying the divinity.

Maybe if you introduced the study of fas in the legal curriculum? That would make you an expert in ritual and tradition. Sounds like the kind of thing the Romans would do.

Very good point. Maybe a degree in religious ritual ?
 

General Zod

Banned
I'm inclined to believe that even with the Medieval agricultural advances, the Roman Empire was pretty close to its "natural" borders. There could be advances into Northern Europe Plains, with some wars against the more organized or motivated tribal groups in the area. But in the East, the Persian Empires (Parthian and then Sassanid) were organized, pretty strong, and a fair way for Roman supply trains to travel.

Again, a Roman Empire that survives and reamins pretty much peaceful domestically and prosperous economically isn't going to stagnate technologically and culturally. Technological advancement and some infrastructure projects like the ones I wrote about are going to relax some logistical bottlenecks.

With a heartland over the Zagros Mtns and a steady supply of steppe nomad peoples who can reinvorgate any defeated Persian empire I can easily see the OTL upper Euphrates border sticking. Fighting far away foreign wars with little to gain and lots to lose has been a non-starter for empires across continents and centuries.

But the point is that Persia was not exactly a worthless wasteland, and much more importatnyl, controlling it would give the Romans full control about their half of the Silk road, and unrestricted access to India. Tradewise, this would be very very protiable to them. And Persia was not unconquerable: ask Alexander, or the Arabs. Both were rather lower, resourcewise and as military skill went, as the Romans. If they good PoD turns the Germanic people from a big problem to a big additional source of manpower and taxes, why they ought not to do it ?

With the Roman Empire having expanded into the Northern European Plain, you could also see situations where steppe nomads take control over pieces of the Roman Empire, and use that territory as staging grounds for further attacks on the rest of the Roman Empire. Similar to what China faced (also similar to the OTL Germanic settlements, also similiar to the Bulfar and Avar attacks on the Eastern Empire), you could see settled populations willing to aid outside forces in attacks on the center. The conquered Germanic tribes who make up the population of the Far German provinces could still end up allying with the Huns when they invade, with Germanic Legions and Hunnic horsemen going over the Alps to unseat an unworthy Emperor.

Possible, but not mandatory. And anyay, with the assimilation of Northern Europe, Rome would reach the "critical mass" as a cultural-political unity, like China, where eastern barbarians could cause temporary dynastic crises, but never permanent fragmentation. The barbarians would always end being assimilated.

Also, the plagues that massively reduced Roman populations are still going to happen. So the Third Century Crisis doesn't lead to the end of the Empire, because the Empire's expansion has headed off any Germanics' Volkwundering, but the Alans and the Slavs are coming later, and if the OTL plague schedule is still on then there will ample area for these barbarians to move into.

Assmilation and development of Northern Europe to High Middle Age levels (thanks to improved agricultural technology) also gives the Empire additional demographic reserves to absorb the shock of the plagues (the Black Plague didn't mean the collapse of Europe) and sincerely IMO for this Empire the Alans and Slavs would be little fry and be defeated and absorbed in short order. The Huns may give this Empire some serious problems to be checked. But the Slavs ? Pfft. Captive manpower to settle Eastern Europe and little else. Their manpower basis was far from being that strong.

The Arabs are still going to emerge from the desert, and whether united behind a Abrahamic banner or not they will be able to wreck havoc on both ends of the Fertile Crescent.

The Arabs got the incredible lucky break of meeting both the Byzantine and the Sassanied Empire when they had mutually exausted themselves. If either had been in better shape the Caliphs would have met a very sorry end. If they meet a strong Empire, the Arabs shall be a minor bump on its history. Their demographic basis was not that strong, nor their military capabilities would be that much impressive, for an Empire that would have withstood the Huns. Of course, this also assuming that the Romans do not conquer Arabia before the natives are in the conditions to start a cycle of expansion. End of story.

The Norse will still come out of the north, though with a stronger Empire you could see them funneled either East or West, forcing large contingents of Norse to settle Iceland/Greenland/Newfoundland/Nova Scotia and the Baltic-to-Black-Sea trade routes.

Yep.

An expansion into the North German Plain means the Roman Empire could survive, but survival does not equal world conquest.

Who spoke about world conquest ? I thought it was pretty clear from previous thread flow that even in the optimistic but plausible best case (which this thread is all about; giving the Romans a generous dose of the plausible lucky breaks they never got) the Roman Empire would become one of 2-4 global great powers. In all likelihood, survival and continued epxansion and cultural progress of the Roman Empire would push China and maybe Japan too into a parallel development. India is a wild card, depending on butterflies they could equally get fully Romanized, or a disunited buffer, or a strong untied third global Empire.

Being able to survive a life-threatening disease does not mean that one becomes the picture of health. I think that a surviving Roman Empire would be more about identity than how the government function. Its about making people think of themselves as 'Romans' before anything else. Its about people looking back on their history and identifying it as the history of Rome, the same way that the Chinese can look back at their history and identify it as the history of China. To borrow from Huntington, the challenge is to have Rome be a civilization masquerading as a state.

But Rome OTL was well halfway to become what you described. Think of how much the cultural heritage of Rome loomed large on Europe for all ages to come. Give them the lucky breaks to survive the crises of 3rd and 5th centuries, and integrate the Teutons and the Slavs just as they did with the Celts, and the fusion of cultural sphere and political untiy would eventually be unkillable, much as it was for China.
 

Terlot

Banned
Again, a Roman Empire that survives and reamins pretty much peaceful domestically and prosperous economically isn't going to stagnate technologically and culturally.
Why should that be ? China stagnated essentially compared to Europe. Why should Roman Empire be different.

And anyay, with the assimilation of Northern Europe, Rome would reach the "critical mass" as a cultural-political unity, like China, where eastern barbarians could cause temporary dynastic crises, but never permanent fragmentation. The barbarians would always end being assimilated.
Russia succesfully conquered Chinese lands though.

Assmilation and development of Northern Europe to High Middle Age levels (thanks to improved agricultural technology) also gives the Empire additional demographic reserves to absorb the shock of the plagues (the Black Plague didn't mean the collapse of Europe)
Because Europe wasn't a unified system.

and Slavs would be little fry and be defeated and absorbed in short order. The Huns may give this Empire some serious problems to be checked. But the Slavs ? Pfft. Captive manpower to settle Eastern Europe and little else.
Why should it be so ? Slavs rivaled HRE in OTL and succesfully waged wars with it so I don't think you can just them all of as "captive manpower".
Their manpower basis was far from being that strong.
What do you mean by that ? Could you share the source of this information ?

As for China and Rome-for long time they will to each othe far away lands, contacted by third party merchants. Rome will be too busy dealing with Mongols, Slavic raiders, Norse pirates, Arab incursion, and combined effects of little ice age, famine and plague that OTL historically hit Europe.

As it will be a large organism and not many ones, it will be hit harder and I don't see it as surviving, after a century or so of strife I can see Europe divided between various successor states.


Give them the lucky breaks to survive the crises of 3rd and 5th centuries, and integrate the Teutons and the Slavs just as they did with the Celts, and the fusion of cultural sphere and political untiy would eventually be unkillable, much as it was for China.
Europe is not China. China did it several thousands of years, you want to that in couple of centuries. Rome's rule will be over antagonistic multitude of cultures and tribes with different languages without unified identity and language-as in OTL. While Latin might be the language of administrators and scholars it will be not the language of people. Face them with a century or so of inevitable self-control as result of internal Roman collapse(which I find inevitable in face of amount of problems heading way for Rome) and you have a seperate state already, and supporting other break-aways as itself.
I don't buy the ideaf Eternal Rome. It has less time then China, more threats, and more cultures to deal with.


Steppe warriors will ruin anyone's day.
And what should stop the Steppe's warriors to coming to Europe ? Rome will face then two invasions from East-first the Slavic one then the Nomad's one.
 

General Zod

Banned
I don't think there will be scientific progress as that experienced by OTL Europe in Reneissance. Big centralised states without much competition can hinder scientific progress. Rome would be big on large projects(canals, roads, agriculture) but I doubt it would develop similiar urge to explore and conquer as Europeans. Why should Rome sail to America if it has a safe route to India and China ? Even if it did-which isn't impossible I don't see Romans as doing much more then establishing trading outposts and perhaps some small colonies in Carribean. In OTL it took two centuries for serious colonisation to start and here I don't see that happening right away either.

I feel no obligation to take it any seriously the myth that big empires cause stagnation, sorry. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

The Romans would most likely eventually discover America by following the same route that the Norse did, since they would have control of the British Isles, and extrnsive trade links with, if not outright vassallization of, Scandinaiva, only differently from the Norse, they would have the numbers and organization to stage a massive colonization of the Americas.

And they woudl colonize the Americas just as eagerly as the Christian Europeans, for pretty much the same reasons: population boom, and greed, with abundance of good land and natural resources in the Americas. They are much more likely to assimilate the natives and mingle them with their own colonists than exterminate them, however.


Additionally this might prolong the Empire but as others noted, Slavs will come later.

Slavs would be a rather minor problem for an Empire that has bested and assimilated the Teutons and the Persians, sorry. That even assuming that the Empire does not preemptively removes the probelm as it did with the Germanics, by expanding in their Sarmatian heartland and conquering them well before they begin an expansion cycle. Ditto for the Arabs.

And the Mongols as well.

They shall be a problem. But only if the Romans have not yet mastered the right military technologies to counter them by then: hyper-organized Roman legions + gunpowder = goodbye Genghis Khan.

And the plague.

The Black Plague did not cause the collapse of ONE European state. If Rome reaches the 14th Century, at the very least it shall be on the very of its own Renaissance, if not more likely its own Industrial Revolution (the effect of all those centuries not lost in the Dark Ages), and be just as sturdy.

So even if Rome lives longer, becomes more developed, eventuall it will collapse.

if Rome lives longer, expands more, and becomes more developed, it becomes just like China. Unshakable cultural unity that always pulls back together to political unity from any crisis. Besides, the longer Rome survives, the stronger it becomes, so the more it becomes ASB to expect that the same external factors (which are not getting any more powerful) would cause the same complete and permanent collapse as IOTL.
 
Top