District of Carthage seems like an obvious one. Another good one might by Cyrene.
District of Carthage seems like an obvious one. Another good one might by Cyrene.
My main consern is Pro-consular Africa, which is under control of the Roman senate. would its juristiction be moved to the Carthaginian Senate? or given direct control under Bonifacius?
other than them maybe a couple of mauretanian provinces? with the westernmost including the pillars of Hercules? Also Sicily will be a separate province (maybe including the Balears).
That depends on Bonifacius's attitude toward what he has accomplished and what he thinks his prospects are of eventually ruling from Rome itself, over all, or most, of the Western Empire. From the thread title, we know from ATL hindsight that he will not manage that feat; what he's doing is laying the basis for a "new Rome" based on North Africa, that will expand beyond old Roman claims to the south, we don't know yet how far. But we have every reason to doubt he or his successors will make much progress in reconsolidating Carthage's hold on anything much north of the Mediterranean. Aside from the hint of the thread title, we have the common-sense observation that the basic institutions of Roman governance in Gaul, Germania, Britannia and Illyricum are splintering where they haven't already collapsed, leaving Italia itself badly exposed. The question is, will Bonifacius see the problem of eventually restoring Roman order to these regions in the same light as the challenges he's already answered in securing control of Africa? Or will he see the zones he already controls as a relatively sheltered port from an unstoppable storm descending on Rome from the north, and foresee (accurately) that he and his successors will need to hunker down and concentrate on developing a new southward base?
If Bonifacius has the ambition of by and by returning to Rome itself and securing at least the northern bounds of Italia as a safe buffer for that city, and eventually he and his successors will win back the Western dioceses to the limits that existed when he was born, then his decisions in these administrative matters now will regard himself as the true emperor in Rome, who needs an administrative structure appropriate to running the whole West, and perhaps the East as well. Besides ambition, such a claim might be seen as important to securing his legitimacy; if he has no intention of ever ruling from Rome, why should "Roman" forces rally to him?
This suggests he would not formally transfer PC-Africa from the Roman Senate; rather, he will speak for that Senate, since any word of contradictory rulings coming from the north will obviously be fraudulent; any so-called "Senate" sitting in Rome will be coerced or an outright fabrication by illegitimate pretenders or barbarian invaders. Only he can judge what a proper free Roman Senate would want. Of course, the privilege of the Roman Senate to rule this particular piece of Africa directly is something any Emperor could have changed at any time for any sufficiently good reason anyway; as an Emperor--the legitimate Western Emperor--he could change the status of that region anyway.
So, under that point of view, he'd keep the elaborate administrative hierarchy of diocese and province, never mind that temporarily some of his provinces belong to a diocese he mostly doesn't control. He'll just have his own administrators for Italia Suburbicarius and Aegyptus and Hispanae; these jobs could be meaningless sinecures or (more likely) they could be hats worn very seriously by agents whose real focus is reconquering their putative dioceses, while someone else runs the province that happens to be the sole piece of said diocese. Aegyptus of course belongs administratively to the East and there, if Bonifacius plans only to secure control of the West and not the whole Empire, he should be planning to hand over his holdings there, presumably for a quid pro quo where his proper role in the West is recognized. Setting up a formal diocesal administrator (sorry, I don't know the proper titles of the levels) there is a declaration that he either plans to secure both Empires, or he's unilaterally and permanently redrawing the lines. So there at least I think he might best skip the step of appointing one for Aegyptus, to avoid being too provocative.
I think it's too early for him to throw in the towel and formally declare a Southern Empire based permanently on Carthage and Africa generally. But pragmatically this is what he has. Pragmatically he doesn't need diocesal government, he has an African core with peripheral claims of a province or two on each of its borders, which call for special governance as disputed zones. Calling the special, presumably military, machinery there "diocesal" will gradually change the meaning of the term to marchland administration.
If he or a later generation successor do redraw the boundaries, on his current scale he hardly needs dioceses; simply setting up provinces all directly under Carthage seems good enough. It's a question of whether they ever get around admitting things have come to that pass.
The various provinces you mention already exist and for the most part, he already has them--I think from the maps I've seen he doesn't yet fully control Baetica in Hispanae and it isn't clear to me that its former borders are sensible frontiers or not; frankly I'd think there especially, unless he or a successor eventually secure control of the whole diocese, with its natural boundary on the northern mountains, the actual borders will fluctuate wildly with the fortunes of war. If they wind up holding only a foothold in Hispanae, I guess it might be called "Baetica," or its name might change. With Sicily, that he already holds, the question is, will they get more of the former diocese of southern Italy, and will that claim include Rome itself. But as a province, Sicily is already his and was previously its own province. I certainly don't see why it should be lumped in with the Balerics! They too are their own unit on the provincial level and were a different diocese on that level; if they retain the two-level system in the future it might make sense to put the Med islands in a new island diocese, but certainly not to consolidate their provincial-level governments!
It seems likely to me that all the dioceses but Africa itself will be border zone military governments; for that reason their historical division will be retained but fluidly reorganized--an Insular Diocese would for instance be logical because its forces would be naval and its communications are all by sea. But if the later course of the southern Empire involves reconquest of a significant part of mainland Italy, I'd think that's where Sicily would go--after all then Sicily would no longer be a frontline border.
I thought that the Balearics were in the province of Hispania Tarraconensis (Before the reforms of the third century).
can i just say, i love it when Shevek has something to say
Nice timeline!!! I always wandered how would a Souther Roman Empire exist and develope itself.
I agree that the WRE is doomed, 10-20 years at most, the Huns will certainly crash the whole thing down
For Bonifacius and his succesors the only safe venue of expansion would be Hispania, if they can reach and fortify the northern mountains with Gaul before the barbarians arrive in huge numbers, the SRE could certainly hold and add a new province.
Neither Italy nor Gaul offer good prospects due to unrelenting warfare
The rest of Libya and Egypt sound nice but the ERE would certainly have something to say about it
Go south now, to Nigeria and beyond
Pending your next map, I was trying to research the timing of the adoption of camels (dromedaries that is) in the Sahara region. The Wikipedia articles mention that the oldest domestication of camels goes back pretty far before our period, and that at some unmentioned point in time the Eastern Romans adopted dromedary cavalry, which worked very well for them. But I seem to remember reading (decades ago!) that actually camels were not widely adopted by the Arabs until not long before the rise of Islam; this is one reason why the Arabs could sweep over the southern margins of the classical world so rapidly under Islam but nothing like that had happened before.
The question here is, can the Southern Empire adopt camels for transiting the Sahara and finding the trade partners to the south we all hope they can? If they are well established doing that kind of thing then if something like Islam does arise in Arabia, they might still be pre-empted from taking over the western desert, if Southern Roman society is going reasonably strong at that point and the desert peoples are reasonably happy to be a part of it.
With "desert power," to lift a phrase from Frank Herbert, based on both camels and a secured alliance/incorporation of desert-dwelling peoples, the Carthage-based empire might even bypass the East's continued control of Egypt itself, link up with the Sudanese and perhaps Axumites, and perhaps even establish direct relations with the Arabs on the Red Sea, conceivably butterflying Islam away completely. (In fact the conventional view of butterflies is that having Muhammed preach Islam as OTL is already impossible, but I am more flexible in these matters--if you want Islam to rise on schedule I think it can be justified. If you don't, just go with consensus and no one can say boo to it!)
If camel-borne, desert savvy Christian loyalists to Carthage are roaming all around the Sahara, then even if they started by bypassing Egypt and avoiding war with the East, sooner or later when that conflict heats up they'd have an advantage comparable to the one the Arabs had. If they can add to it the offer of religious tolerance then, unless the Eastern emperors were astute enough to rein in their own intolerance and neutralize that point, they'd have the other one--Christians in the southern parts of the Eastern empire went over to the Arabs OTL because they were the "wrong" denomination according to the Emperor and had suffered persecution and discrimination; the Arabs offered a better deal. ITTL a tolerant and partially desert-based South Empire should be able to scoop up Egypt eventually, and depending on circumstances might well get Palestine as well.
On the other side of Africa, I'd think that once overland routes to West Africa were explored, given the confidence of knowing a viable commercial destination exists on the far side, coastwise shipping from west Mauretania around the desert coasts to West African ports ought to develop. In turn this might lead to the discovery of the Azores and the rediscovery and incorporation of other Atlantic islands; and eventually even landings in the Americas. "Eventually" might be a very long time down, given that ships need to evolve as well as navigational techniques, and it might very well be long after the Southern Empire itself has fallen--but there would be successor nations merging late Roman and West African cultures.
So--who knows stuff about the history of camel domestication in the Sahara? If they were already established long before our period, then the question arises of whether the new Empire has any advantage over the historical OTL realms there in North Africa or for that matter older Roman regimes. If it is ASB to have camels come into use about now, then the contact with West Africa is more problematic.
Basically I want someone to tell me that now is a good time for the camel to be introduced into western North Africa and that with it, a political and social union of the desert peoples with Southern Rome is possible.
What information? I've handed you nothing but questions and airy speculation! I was fishing for someone who actually knows something to say yea or nay about the timing of dromedary use!Good Information, It will be put to good use.
As for Camel domestication, I wonder if it would be possible for the Berber's to domesticate camels, then seek greener pastures in southern rome, peacefully like the vandals did. These berbers could introduce the camels to the Southern Romans who then utilize them for first trade then military. Is that plausible?
Good update! Cultural and political updates like this certainly give it that extra breath of life
What information? I've handed you nothing but questions and airy speculation! I was fishing for someone who actually knows something to say yea or nay about the timing of dromedary use!
I wish I knew! It sounds all right. The question arises, why, if camel use is spreading north and west from its heartland (which I gather may have been Somalia) why they wouldn't be first known to the Eastern Empire.
A possible answer, "because the East was run by arrogant religious bigots." But then, the fatal failure to hold on to the loyalties of the southeast was some centuries later. And I still don't know when the Byzantines adopted their dromedary mobile legions. If they did it well after the loss of Egypt and Palestine, it could be they foolishly blew off opportunities to set down roots among the camel traders earlier as I suggest above, but learned their hard lesson belatedly after it was too late.
But if they actually had Dromedarii before Islam, then there's that wild speculation shot down. Presumably if they had a camel corps that early, then it is hard to see why they couldn't pioneer trans-Saharan trade routes themselves.
I'm always happy to provide wild wooly speculation! But when people start just accepting my word as gospel, that's when I get scared and freeze up.
So yes, your "Berbers cozy up to Carthage from the south, arriving on camels" seems plausible enough to me, but I don't really know enough to have any kind of authoritative answer. Sorry!
Remember the Council of Chalcedon has not happened yet.
East was not run by arrogant religious bigots. If that is your answer then you know nothing of the eastern empire.
Prefrence is was not directed a you but Shevek23.
The Eastern Empire will never let egypt be taken by south rome. They will come for the Territory captured by south rome and will send a very competant general. I still think that your characterization Theodosius II in taking to the feild was wrong on highky unrealisted no matter how you justify it. It would never happen. Heraclius was the first emperor in centuries to personally lead troops. This would be left to close family and professionals.
Horses was still the main mode of transport during this time.