The Roman Empire is split earlier

Instead of the Roman Empire not splitting into West and East until 395, what if instead it splits in AD 14 after the death of Augustus. Does this make the empire more managable and does this earlier division allow it to last longer with an emperor in the West and East?
 
395 wasn't anything like a constitutional division. It was intended simply as a division of authority between two emperors who were supposed to rule the empire together, each one in his part. That had been done before - you could argue that the Second Triumvirate makes it older than the Empire, in fact. What was different in 395 was that the two halves went their different ways rather than being reunited by war or heredity.

Had that happened earlier, I think we'd have mostly seen warfare between the two halves.
 
It was also split (in three) in the third century but later reunited by Aurelian. We can assume that at the time the attractive forces were still stronger than the repulsive ones.
 
There was a de facto split of the Empire some time earlier after the battle of Filippoi... Octavian ruled the Western part and Mark Antony the Eastern part... Hadn't these 2 clashed my guess is that there would be a permanent split...
 
Top