What if theodosius I lived 30 more years

Like it saids in the title. What if the last emperor of a unified Rome made it 30 more years dying at 78. Can he make his sons competent in that time? Who would he make his successor if his sons die on schedule before him? How would he shape the empire and its army to fight its enemies? How can he improve tax collection and law in 30 years (let's say he is in a reforming mood in his last 30 years)? How does history change?

Scenario 2: On top of the 30 years both of his son are very competent men. When Honorius reaches his majority he rules the prefecture of Gaul from trier to defend the Rhine. Arcadius the prefecture of the east from Antioch to protect against the Persian. And theodosius himself rules the middle two prefectures from Milan to protect the Danube. They all work tougther to preserve the empire.
 
Last edited:
Like it saids in the title. What if the last emperor of a unified Rome made it 30 more years dying at 78. Can he make his sons competent in that time? Who would he make his successor if his sons die on schedule before him? How would he shape the empire and its army to fight its enemies? How can he improve tax collection and law in 30 years (let's say he is in a reforming mood in his last 30 years)? How does history change?

Even though I'm a Christian, Theodosius was a bigot whose one real achievement was getting the otherwise also bigoted St. Ambrose to get so pissed off, the principle of Separation of Church and State got established.

Unless he appointed someone like Stilcho as his second-in-command, his reign would have become a disaster.
 
Even though I'm a Christian, Theodosius was a bigot whose one real achievement was getting the otherwise also bigoted St. Ambrose to get so pissed off, the principle of Separation of Church and State got established.

Unless he appointed someone like Stilcho as his second-in-command, his reign would have become a disaster.

Who was his second in command when he died again?
 
Who was his second in command when he died again?

Stilicho.

I have no love for Theodosius but things would not have been as grim for the western empire if he remained alive for a while.The man's a Christian fanatic,yes,but he would have been competent enough to hold the empire together.For one,the resources of both parts of the empire would have been pooled together to destroy the Visigoths.Stilicho was very close to succeeding in OTL but was impeded from doing so by the eastern empire.
 
Stilicho.

I have no love for Theodosius but things would not have been as grim for the western empire if he remained alive for a while.The man's a Christian fanatic,yes,but he would have been competent enough to hold the empire together.For one,the resources of both parts of the empire would have been pooled together to destroy the Visigoths.Stilicho was very close to succeeding in OTL but was impeded from doing so by the eastern empire.

Stilicho had no intention of destroying the Visigoths. Instead, he wished to use Alaric in particular for his own ends. That's one of the reasons (the other being unable to risk losing significant forces in a decisive battle) that he never finished Alaric off early on in Illyria, or later on in Italy. This was a deliberate strategy, and its goals are obvious when eventually Stilicho sought to use Alaric to regain control of Illyricum for the Western Empire. Though I will agree, if Stilicho is able to control both the eastern and western courts, he can handily defeat Alaric, and has the incentive to do so (and therefore settle the Goths on more advantageous terms to the Roman state). The problem is though, there are still strong vested interests and powerful figures in both the east and west who are in opposition to Stilicho. And they are particularly strong in the east, where real power at the time was more consolidated during this period in civil authorities in Constantinople, which makes it more difficult for Stilicho to exert control. Though Stilicho was nothing if not a deft politician.
 
Stilicho.

I have no love for Theodosius but things would not have been as grim for the western empire if he remained alive for a while.The man's a Christian fanatic,yes,but he would have been competent enough to hold the empire together.For one,the resources of both parts of the empire would have been pooled together to destroy the Visigoths.Stilicho was very close to succeeding in OTL but was impeded from doing so by the eastern empire.

Thought so. And you got to admit he at least was better then his sons. Of course Honorius chicken would have made a better emperor then those idiots. Also when is the earliest a United empire whould no longer have need of the goths so stilicho can get rid of them?
 
Stilicho had no intention of destroying the Visigoths. Instead, he wished to use Alaric in particular for his own ends. That's one of the reasons (the other being unable to risk losing significant forces in a decisive battle) that he never finished Alaric off early on in Illyria, or later on in Italy. This was a deliberate strategy, and its goals are obvious when eventually Stilicho sought to use Alaric to regain control of Illyricum for the Western Empire. Though I will agree, if Stilicho is able to control both the eastern and western courts, he can handily defeat Alaric, and has the incentive to do so (and therefore settle the Goths on more advantageous terms to the Roman state). The problem is though, there are still strong vested interests and powerful figures in both the east and west who are in opposition to Stilicho. And they are particularly strong in the east, where real power at the time was more consolidated during this period in civil authorities in Constantinople, which makes it more difficult for Stilicho to exert control. Though Stilicho was nothing if not a deft politician.
True and he has the backing of the emperor.

Also added a scenario on top of the 30 years both of theodosius sons are compentet
 
Top