Vision Failed- Constantine loses

Foreword-
I've had the idea to write this timeline for a while, but held off, thinking that someone with a low post-count doing such an ambitious timeline might be frowned upon. However, a lot of people seem to be taking interest in the christianization of thr Roman Empire of late, so I decided to hurry up and write it before someone else does. I apologise in advance for the the long delays that will, inevitably, occur. I'll try to reserch as much as I can, but if you spot any mistakes, please tell me, preferably well I can still edit them. With that out of the way

Part 1- The Seige Of Rome

It is the beginning of February. The year is 313 - or is it. For though they don’t know it, the two armies drawn up here are fighting in part over whether what happened approximately 313 years ago was truly that important. If they knew what sort of religious war they were fighting, many- both inside the city and out- would change sides. Indeed, the only man who is trying to spread the view that this is a battle between Christianity and the old gods thinks he is lying[1]…
--------------------------------------------
Two legionaries stood on the walls of Rome, the city in the middle of the world, under orders to keep watch. In reality, they were just gossiping.
“So what do you think we’re waiting for anyways?”
“Nobody seems to know. They’re obviously not going to attack, and who would come to help us? I guess Maxentius hasn’t realized that everybody hates him.”
“I think he’s losing it. Remember how at the beginning of this siege, he destroyed the bridge, then got ready to attack, then called it off[2]”
--------------------------------------------------
Though everybody may have hated Maxentius, Constantine’s camp was not as united as it once had been. Rumours were flying about the odd design that new adorned their standards and shields. It appeared to be the letters X-R or X-P overlaid, none of which (or so the literate claimed” appeared in “Flavius Valerius Aurelius Constantinus” at all. There was a rumor going around that they stood for “Christ” and that Constantine had converted to christianity. Of course, that isn’t quite how they said it…
“We’re on the wrong side. If Constantine wins, he’ll make Christianity the official religion of the entire Empire! The gods of your fathers will be forbidden! Sadomasochism will be required! Children will be eaten![3] We must act!”
“Shove it.”
“I don’t know, Quarto, he is a city slicker. And he has been acting odd lately.” Cautus had always been nervous about this strange this strange cult that had been emerging in cities across the empire.
“That guy is either a lunatic or a ferret, and likely to be flogged for it. Ignore him.”
-----------------------------------------------------------
Another month and a half passed. Rome was increasingly unruly due to food rationing. Then one of the soldiers on the wall saw a disturbance in Constantine’s besieging camps. Taking advantage of the riots and fires, Maxentius led his army out and attacked. Constantine wasn’t able to respond fast enough, as he was occupied fighting fires. By the time he was able to form a battle line, half his army was already dead or routing. Constantine himself was captured alive, and, appropriately enough, crucified. Rumours flew that Constantine had been a Christian- rumours that Maxentius, now Western Roman Emperor, covertly encouraged, thinking that defeating an aposatate would improve his reputation (which could hardly get worse) in case there was a fight with whoever won in the east…

[1] As a blatant attempt to sidestep the uncertainty regarding how Christian Constantine actually was at the time, I’m having Constantine’s enemies spread a story very similar to the OTL popular version of events.
[2] This is the PoD. In OTL, Maxentius did counterattack, lost horribly, and died.
[3] The last two are actual Roman misconceptions.
EDIT- I apologise for the name of the thread, I now realize that that that pun is terrible.
 
Last edited:
According to Lacantius, Constantine told him that he only had the vision in a dream, and that he only mentioned this years after the fact, so it may not have been an actual event. Plus, apart from his favouring Christians, Constantine was on the fence about religion until late in his life, and his coins showed Sol Invictus on them.
 
According to Lacantius, Constantine told him that he only had the vision in a dream, and that he only mentioned this years after the fact, so it may not have been an actual event. Plus, apart from his favouring Christians, Constantine was on the fence about religion until late in his life, and his coins showed Sol Invictus on them.

I'm not saying that there was a real vision- I don't believe in such things. I'll admit that the way I handled the uncertenity about what actually happened (by having Maxentius' propaganda department say something very similar to what Constantines did IOTL) is a bit handwave-y, but I thought I made it clear that I was doing it. Basically, I never said that Constantine was a christian, just that people think that he was- ITL historians will probably declare it a false rumor. Thanks for the criticism anyways.
 
Last edited:
I'm not saying that there was a real vision- I don't believe in such things. I'll admit that the way I handled the uncertenity about what actually happened (by having Maxentius' propaganda department say something very similar to what Constantines did IOTL) is a bit handwave-y, but I thought I made it clear that I was doing it. Basically, I never said that Constantine was a christian, just that people think that he was- ITL historians will probably declare it a false rumor. Thanks for the criticism anyways.
The thing is, contemporary accounts of the battle don't mention it. Even the dream is only related a few years later. Basically it's something Maxentius would have to make up out of whole cloth and it's not something people would likely have believed of Constantine yet.
 
Last edited:
Okay, I changed it. Everybody's claims about constantine are now much less specific. The truth is, I thought that a spectacular failure here would be a good way to make it more beleivable that some other emperor doesn't convert to christianity for a while, but I don't want to include propaganda from someone who never lived to say it in my first timeline.
 
How long does Rome retain its multicultural Polytheism? And will the Tetrarchy system continue into the Fourth Century CE?

My plans are still pretty vague at the moment- I have a general idea of what's going to happen, but still have to work out the details. to answer your questions, the tetrarchy won't remain exactly, but the idea that Rome is now to big to be completely united will survive. The roman empire will be come so disunited so fast that there's no simple answer to your first question.
 
I knew that it was a bad idea to start this timeline right before exams. Anyways, here's the next part.

Part 2- picking up the pieces

In autumn of 313, everything was falling apart for Maxentius. His attempts to portray convince everybody that Constantine was a Christian had had the opposite effect that he had planned, not convincing anybody that Maxentius was in the right, but getting Rome’s Christian population even angrier at him. Every other week, the legions had to put down a riot somewhere, and most likely the only reason that Gaul and Britain, which had been Constantine’s domain, weren’t rebelling was that he hadn’t really tried to claim them yet. To top it all off, he finally received word that Licinius, who had been Constantine’s ally had defeated Maximinus II, who Maxentius had been supporting[1]. He quickly arranged a meeting with Licinius, where the following terms were it was agreed that Maxentius would be the emperor of the West, and Licinius would be emperor of the East, both with the title of Augustus, and that the title Caesar would be abolished (except as the title of the as heir of an Augustus), in an attempt to prevent further civil wars.

Nobody was under any delusion that anybody wanted peace. Maxentius knew that if there were a war, he would lose, as he still barely controlled anything, whilst Licinius was hoping that the west would completely disintegrate, so that he could conquer it easily. This seemed especially likely because Maxentius at that time had no living sons and few close male relatives at all, so there was no clear choice for his sucessor. Maxentius was aware of this as well, and his first instinct was to appoint Maximinus, but he turned out to be dead. After much searching, he eventually decided to try to placate any Constantine loyalists by making Flavius Dalmatius, who was closely related to both Constantine and Maxentius, his successor. Though this was somewhat successful, he still spent the rest of his life dealing with rebellions, and it is said that he looked over one hundred years old when he died in 329, despite actually being around fifty. Maxentius’ son Felix did not oppose Dalmatius (and probably wouldn’t have been taken seriously if he did, as he was ten years old). As a final indignity to Maxentius, the new Western Roman Emperor Dalmatius I was finally able to restore some semblance of order by (among other things) declaring that “the rumours that my brother was a Christian coming to save his fellows from something- I don’t know what- are lies designed to create division”. A mere year later, Licinius died of what is now believed to have been heart failure, possibly as a result of realising that he had waited too long to invade. His son, Licinius II, didn’t seem particularly interested in becoming the sole ruler of the Empire. After decades, it seemed that Rome had finally settled on a new status quo. Of course, it was not to be.

[1] More-or-less as OTL- considering how slow messages travelled at that time, it is unlikely that anybody in the East had any ATL information until after it was clear that Maximian was finished.
 
Part 3- Who’s next?

Dalmatius and Licinius II[1] were both competent, but not particularly interesting. Dalmatius, like Maxentius before him, spent most of his reign trying to put down rebellions, but he was significantly more successful, and by the 340s the Western Roman Empire was fairly stable, though Britain was still loosely attached. Licinius II spent most of his reign living decadently in a villa near Nicaea, but he occasionally felt like he should be doing something, commissioned a building, and went back to his villa for the next few year with his conscience silenced. He is also noted for being fairly tolerant of Christianity. Rome would have to wait for the next generation for more drama.

The son of Licinius II, Ruricius, was ambitious, but very dense. Dalmatius II was an ambitious Roman aristocrat with little to distinguish himself [2]. However, it was not certain that he was to succeed his father- Maxentius’ son, Valerius Felix thought that he deserved his father’s title now that he had finished puberty and so forth. Usually, one of them would have been given the title Caesar and part of the Empire, but Dalmatius II claimed that this was now illegal, and refused to accept this. Felix then offered another compromise- that he would be emperor and name Dalmatius II Caesar without giving him land (I.E, make him his successor). Dalmatius argued that as he was older[2], he should be first in that arrangement. Felix had no counterargument for this, so he waited until Emperor Dalmatius I was off campaigning against Frankish raiders in 352 and then locked his son up until he renounced all claims. He did so, certain that when his father returned, he would punish Felix for this.

What Felix knew and Dalmatius II didn’t was that his father was dead at the Battle of Aduatuca. Despite that, the battle was still a roman victory. The Roman Army outnumbered the Frankish invaders three to two and were able to completely surround them. With nowhere to run, the Frankish chief (whose name has been lost to history) managed to rally his forces and break out through the part of the roman army that had contained Dalmatius, then simply ran off the battlefield all the way across the frontier, probably not even realizing that he had slain the emperor. By the time this became well-known in Rome, Valerius Felix had declared himself Emperor of the West. The way he went about this shows how his mind worked- he did things spectacularly, but not necessarily well. Appropriately enough, he is one of the most divisive figures of the Roman Realignment[3].

[1] Very likely not the same person as IOTL.
[2] Dalmatius IIs date of birth is unknown, he might not be he same person as IOTL either.
[3] TTL name for the period of approximately from the Crisis of the Third Century through the invasion of the Huns.
 

Arrix85

Donor
this TL is quite interesting... roman realignment seem to suggest a surviving empire. Have you already an idea about the reforms necessary to manage that?
 
this TL is quite interesting... roman realignment seem to suggest a surviving empire. Have you already an idea about the reforms necessary to manage that?

Not quite. Reallignment is an euphamism. My current plan is for Rome to balkanize and then pretend to still be united. If I am not mistaken, this actually happened several times.
 
Top