Stilitcho Lives And Effectively Rules The WRE

How could we get Flavors Stilitcho to be the effective ruler of the WRE by 410 AD. Preferably of the ERE as well. How would that work out? Would Rome be saved as an empire? What if?
 

Deleted member 67076

Saved, yes probably if the invasions are stopped. Also there is a timeline on this
 
Okay. To get control of both the east and west, he's going to really have to be even more politically savvy than he was OTL. Immediately after Theodosius's death, he needs to assert his claim that he's the guardian of both Honorius and Arcadius, and act on it immediately. If he can somehow pull that off (the eastern court absolutely despised Stilicho with every fiber of their being) then he's virtually unassailable. Alaric is also going to bite the dust rather quickly, as it was only the eastern court forcing Stilicho to withdraw from their territory that saved Alaric. That also means the Goths are going to be destroyed as an independent and unified culture and political entity, and become split up.

Another consequence is the crucial praefecture of Illyircum, taken from the west and given to the eastern part of the empire for Theodosius, will be returned to the western empire. Stilicho tried mightily to achieve this OTL, but was always thwarted by the east, or by the untimely invasions of 405-406 simultaneously happening with Constantine arriving on the shores of Gaul from Britain. Illyricum will help the west mightily. It had a massive recruitment and tax base that the western empire desperately needed. Losing it doesn't hurt the east that much, as they had other places to draw their manpower from.

Now if you can stop the invasions of 405-406 (easy, just have the Franks beat them at the Rhine as they nearly did OTL) and have the usurpers in Britain crushed quickly (again, not that hard to do), then the western empire is in a really strong position, equal to that of where they were before Theodosius devastated their manpower in the two civil wars he won against the west. That is, in at least as good a position as the east was in, if not stronger as it was directly after Adrianople.

Also, the majority of the Germanic incursions into the empire would continue to come across the Danube as they were before, and not the Rhine. The Rhine only opened up as the main place of crossing over thanks to the complete frontier collapse seen when the invasions of 405-406 happening simultaneously with the British legions landing in Britain completely screwed the empire over. The Danube will likely remain the main threat as it had always been when it comes to barbarian migrations/incursions into the empire. That alone has serious butterflies.


Saved, yes probably if the invasions are stopped. Also there is a timeline on this

A couple actually I think. Your's starts right after Stilicho's fall though right? Though I kinda abandoned mine (although I am gonna restart it at some point in the future).
 

Deleted member 67076

A couple actually I think. Your's starts right after Stilicho's fall though right? Though I kinda abandoned mine (although I am gonna restart it at some point in the future).
A few months after to be precise. Hopefully you will, It was good.

Also you've pretty much covered what I was gonna say.
 
*Though I kinda abandoned mine (although I am gonna restart it at some point in six months)

What's your one? I'd be interested to see it, I'm a fan of your TL, particularly the Diadochi one.
 
If i am not mistaken Stilicho was married to Theodosius niece Serina which was his source of power and influence among other things... However he wasnt exactly popular and had many enemies inside the senators and patricians and any attempt by Stilicho to gain more power would be foiled by a large coalition of Roman nobility... If Stilicho wanted to claim power he would have to make his move around 404/405 but even then success is not guaranteed plus he had to rely in foreign troops and foreign aid something that would make him even more unpopular and propably lead to a conspiracy/coup to get rid of him...
 
The Rhine only opened up as the main place of crossing over thanks to the complete frontier collapse seen when the invasions of 405-406 happening simultaneously with the British legions landing in Britain completely screwed the empire over. The Danube will likely remain the main threat as it had always been when it comes to barbarian migrations/incursions into the empire. That alone has serious butterflies.

And WHY are we assuming that if 405-406 fails, no one tries later (either tries again or a different group tries)? That the Rhine is impenetrable/seen as such?

Things like this are why I have such a low opinion of the WRE's chances - there's no acknowledgment that beating off one invasion is the beginning, not the conclusion.
 
And WHY are we assuming that if 405-406 fails, no one tries later (either tries again or a different group tries)? That the Rhine is impenetrable/seen as such?

Things like this are why I have such a low opinion of the WRE's chances - there's no acknowledgment that beating off one invasion is the beginning, not the conclusion.

I'm going off Peter Heather here. Notice that after 405-406 and 408-409, there weren't really any more major penetrations across the Rhine until Atilla. The whole reason they went across the Rhine and not the Danube was because Stilicho had drawn troops away to prepare for his invasion of Illyricum, among other reasons (for weakening the Rhine defenses). It was only so successful because it coincided with Constantine landing in Britain and instead of defeating them, using them and opening them up to Spain to help in there.

There's little reason to assume that with a POD right after Theodosius's death, the western romam empire can't continue to defend the Rhine border in the same effective way they had always had. Especially with control of Illyricum, as having control of that vital praefecture would more or less solve their manpower problems.

Now, once the Hunnic empire (assuming it forms into a single empire under a TTL Atilla) collapses (as it certainly will once said TTL Atilla dies) then, there's going to be huge problems on the Rhine. It was really the collapse of the Hunnic Empire that did the most harm to the Western Roman Empire.
 
I'm going off Peter Heather here. Notice that after 405-406 and 408-409, there weren't really any more major penetrations across the Rhine until Atilla.

So after the Vandals had already entered the empire, they didn't enter it again?

Picking one of the groups that caused trouble.

It's interesting how technically the WRE controls a large chunk of the territory it held a century earlier in the mid-5th century, on paper - but by 476 the fact that barbarians are ruling, not Roman governors, had kicked in.

The whole reason they went across the Rhine and not the Danube was because Stilicho had drawn troops away to prepare for his invasion of Illyricum, among other reasons (for weakening the Rhine defenses). It was only so successful because it coincided with Constantine landing in Britain and instead of defeating them, using them and opening them up to Spain to help in there.

There's little reason to assume that with a POD right after Theodosius's death, the western romam empire can't continue to defend the Rhine border in the same effective way they had always had. Especially with control of Illyricum, as having control of that vital praefecture would more or less solve their manpower problems.
This assumption that "the Romans can just keep up what they've always been doing as if circumstances haven't changed at all" just falls flat. This ISN'T the situation they always had, even if the West controls Illyricum and even if no one assassinates Stilicho (sooner than 410, at least).

Now, once the Hunnic empire (assuming it forms into a single empire under a TTL Atilla) collapses (as it certainly will once said TTL Atilla dies) then, there's going to be huge problems on the Rhine. It was really the collapse of the Hunnic Empire that did the most harm to the Western Roman Empire.
Not to be confused with the fact the Roman Empire in the West had already been walked over by the Visigoths and other groups (see the 451 map in The New Penguin Atlas of Medieval History - or the 420 one for that matter, where even more of the territory is still technically Roman.).

Finally, and not irrelevantly, Stilchio is going to be 51 in 410. Being generous, he has another 10-20 years. Let's be really, really generous and say thirty.

What then? The barbarians haven't disappeared.
 
So after the Vandals had already entered the empire, they didn't enter it again?

Picking one of the groups that caused trouble.
You are correct partially. A group of Vandals entered the empire earlier in Pannonia and were settled there. After 405-406 though, the Vandals didn't enter the empire again to my knowledge. Both the Hasding and Siling Vandals entered in 405-406, one of them (I forget which) being destroyed as an independent entity in Spain after the Romans beat them.

The Suevi didn't either, and neither did the Alans to my knowledge.

It's interesting how technically the WRE controls a large chunk of the territory it held a century earlier in the mid-5th century, on paper - but by 476 the fact that barbarians are ruling, not Roman governors, had kicked in.
The situation in 476 is markedly different than the situation in 406.

This assumption that "the Romans can just keep up what they've always been doing as if circumstances haven't changed at all" just falls flat. This ISN'T the situation they always had, even if the West controls Illyricum and even if no one assassinates him (sooner than 410, at least).
They can at least until the 430's when the Hunnic Empire forms.

Not to be confused with the fact the Roman Empire in the West had already been walked over by the Visigoths and other groups (see the 451 map in The New Penguin Atlas of Medieval History - or the 420 one for that matter, where even more of the territory is still technically Roman.).
What? Alaric was for the most part settled in eastern roman territory. He attempted to force Stilicho to grant him land in the west in 402 but Stilicho beat him and forced him back. Butterflying away what happens in 409-410 is probably the easiest of all these things to do.

Finally, and not irrelevantly, Stilchio is going to be 51 in 410. Being generous, he has another 10-20 years. Let's be really, really generous and say thirty.
Oh, I know. But theres other figures that can take his place like his staunch ally and extremely talented commander Constantius, who died prematurely in 421 OTL for reasons unknown.

What then? The barbarians haven't disappeared.
What then depends on a number of factors, specifically how the Romans handle Stilicho's death, who the emperors are, what the Huns are doing, etc.
 
You are correct partially. A group of Vandals entered the empire earlier in Pannonia and were settled there. After 405-406 though, the Vandals didn't enter the empire again to my knowledge. Both the Hasding and Siling Vandals entered in 405-406, one of them (I forget which) being destroyed as an independent entity in Spain after the Romans beat them.

The Suevi didn't either, and neither did the Alans to my knowledge.

And they don't really need to, thus my post - they've already entered, the damage was done.

The saying that comes to mind is locking the barn door after the horse bolted.

The situation in 476 is markedly different than the situation in 406.
Sure. But that seventy years turn things from "looking reasonably good" to being "There is no Roman emperor in the west, here's the insigna back." is not a good sign.

They can at least until the 430's when the Hunnic Empire forms.
I admire but do not share your confidence.

What? Alaric was for the most part settled in eastern roman territory. He attempted to force Stilicho to grant him land in the west in 402 but Stilicho beat him and forced him back. Butterflying away what happens in 409-410 is probably the easiest of all these things to do.
Alaric is ONE of the WRE's problems. I'm looking less at the sack of Rome and more about stuff after it - and the Visigoths establishing what amounts to a kingdom of their own in SW Gaul. It was the ability of the barbarians to do the latter that did more to turn the west from at least nominally Roman to something once under Roman rule than any damage to Rome the city.

And the extent to which Rome is dependent on the feoderati is discouraging. I'm not sure changing who holds Illyricum changes that a whit.

Oh, I know. But theres other figures that can take his place like his staunch ally and extremely talented commander Constantius, who died prematurely in 421 OTL for reasons unknown.
How old was he?
 
And they don't really need to, thus my post - they've already entered, the damage was done.
And if they are crushed, they don't exist. If, for example the Franks defeat them, which they very nearly did, they are all but destroyed.

.



Sure. But that seventy years turn things from "looking reasonably good" to being "There is no Roman emperor in the west, here's the insigna back." is not a good sign.
It isn't you are right. But the WRE experienced a run of extremely bad luck in the 5th century.

I admire but do not share your confidence.
Why?

Alaric is ONE of the WRE's problems. I'm looking less at the sack of Rome and more about stuff after it - and the Visigoths establishing what amounts to a kingdom of their own in SW Gaul. It was the ability of the barbarians to do the latter that did more to turn the west from at least nominally Roman to something once under Roman rule than any damage to Rome the city.
Alaric was the one who sacked Rome. The whole reason they moved into Southern Gaul can be traced directly to the fall of Stilicho.



How old was he?
We don't actually know, though he was probably 40, if you trace back his career. I don't mean prematurely as in he died young, more that his death came suddenly and unexpectedly. He didn't show any signs of ill health-he had been elevated to co-emperor by Honorius the year before he died-.
 
And if they are crushed, they don't exist. If, for example the Franks defeat them, which they very nearly did, they are all but destroyed.

I wasn't aware that "Defeated" meant "destroyed".

Care to explain how?
.
It isn't you are right. But the WRE experienced a run of extremely bad luck in the 5th century.

I would - again - dispute that it was merely "bad luck". Yes, shitty things happened. But shitty things happened in Byzantium in the seventh century and it survived and would rebound. Shitty things happened in the eleventh century and it would manage to pull things together long enough to endure.

Why shitty things in the fifth century in the West sees it disappear in less than a century (from Theodosius's death) speaks of something beyond 'bad luck".


The army's disappointing to terrible OTL performance?

Yes, bad things happened in that period. And they happened in the 7th century without wiping out the Roman Empire - not for lack of trying.

It faced disasters vs. Hannibal and won the war.

So either its enemies were stronger or it was weaker, or both.

Alaric was the one who sacked Rome. The whole reason they moved into Southern Gaul can be traced directly to the fall of Stilicho.

And of course, Stilcho not falling prevents ANY train of events that leads them into southern Gaul, because he can glare at them and they die.

We don't actually know, though he was probably 40, if you trace back his career. I don't mean prematurely as in he died young, more that his death came suddenly and unexpectedly. He didn't show any signs of ill health-he had been elevated to co-emperor by Honorius the year before he died-.

I'm not really sure in the context of the period that dying of illness despite having been in good health earlier is entirely an unlikely outcome. Illness is omnipresent and hard to deal with - and the position of Emperor is immensely stressful (and we now that stress and the immune system don't mix well).

I'm not saying he would die at this point in any timeline, but let's say Stilcho dies at sixty. So Contantinus is in his forties (by your reckoning, which I'll run with until someone has a better idea).

He's an old man by mid century.
 
Top