Which Roman provinces would be the most interesting splinter state or secondary empire?

Deleted member 97083

If any province(s) or diocese in the Roman Empire became the center of a new Roman empire (like the Byzantine Empire) ruled by a Roman usurper but "going native" or developing into its own tradition, which province would lead to the most interesting result, and why? If you're thinking of a pre-Christianity POD, also say what religion you think that new empire would adopt.

The secession from the empire would occur any time from 1 AD to 500 AD.

Closest OTL examples:
  • Syria (Palmyrene Empire)
  • Gaul (Gallic Empire)
  • Italia (Odoacer Rex Italiae)
  • Gaul (Syagrius)
  • Illyria (Julius Nepos)
An obvious option would be Africa and a new Roman empire ruled from Carthage. Another would be any King Arthur-inspired scenario in Britain, with a Romano-Briton usurper fighting the Saxons.
 
I’d mention the anti-Latin coalition of rebel Samnite/Marsi cities from the Social War, but that’s before 1 AD. It’d be interesting to see a rival to Rome arising so late and on the very vicinity of the city itself. I’d also like the prospect of Marc Antony beating Octavian and carving a personal empire in the eastern Med.
But now, for a post-Augustus scenario, you could have the rebel Carausius survive past the 290’s AD and become some sort of early King (Emperor?) Arthur in Britain.
 
Last edited:
For another Romano-Briton scenario Constatine III would be interesting. Stable Empire based in Britain that shields against Germanic invasions and has influence in Gaul-Hispania.
 
For another Romano-Briton scenario Constatine III would be interesting. Stable Empire based in Britain that shields against Germanic invasions and has influence in Gaul-Hispania.
Maybe through Alaric living beyond 410 AD and invading north Africa, driving a wedge between Constantine III and Constantinople?
 
What about Hispania? Is one of The oldest Román provinces With The Pirineos in the east as natural defender and sea on all The other side Is really easy to Maintain and defend,

Edit:words
 
Last edited:
I'd be interested in a Britannic empire, because 1) Gaul and Hispania are so Romanized by the OTL Fall that evolving into SOME form of modern French and Spanish civilization and their local sub-cultures as we know them is inevitable, but 2) Britain, however, was seemingly still primarily Celtic in culture with only the tiniest smattering of Latin plastered over it.

In the same way the Byzantines were a Greek Empire with the Roman name and government, so too would this Britannic Empire be a Greater Wales nation with said Romanic name-government in and of itself.
 
Have Exarchate of Africa forces under Grigorius pull off a draw or a victory in 647, then you'd give Africa a couple of decades during the first and second Fitwa to consolidate into a state. IIRC western isles were already under their administration and they could also pull Ravenna exarchate off of Byzantium eventually, so it can end up as a Western and Eastern "Byzantiums" Roman Empires during the middle ages.
 
I'd be interested in a Britannic empire, because 1) Gaul and Hispania are so Romanized by the OTL Fall that evolving into SOME form of modern French and Spanish civilization and their local sub-cultures as we know them is inevitable
I highly doubt that these Is The case with Spain, not te romanization bit, but Say that all The years under Al-Andalus crucial to the formation of Spain as how que know now, The Warrior culture, The fanatisms, The devolpment of all their culture, ir anything we will ensing With something that look more roman that italy itself
 
Although it overlaps with the Palmyrene Empire, I've never heard of a Romano-Egyptian breakaway establishing its independence with the capital itself in Egypt rather than Syria.
 
I think the further development of a Romano-Berber state would be interesting - perhaps a more successful Kingdom of the Moors and Romans which grows powerful enough to present itself as a Roman "successor state" of sorts in Mauretania and/or Africa in the last years of the western empire.
 
There is no more natural successor state to Rome than Carthage (ironic value aside). Culturally, linguistically, and religiously, the region had a fascinating fusion of Roman, Punic, and Berber influences. It was among the most important provinces to the Romans since it was conquered in the Punic Wars, so could clearly support an impressive force.

Morocco, Britain, and Turkey, and Egypt.

A successor state in Morocco would have little of its territory based in modern Morocco, unless the rest of the region was conquered at some point (thus expanding Mauretania Tingitana). It's definitely plausible for the Romans to conquer the place.

I think the further development of a Romano-Berber state would be interesting - perhaps a more successful Kingdom of the Moors and Romans which grows powerful enough to present itself as a Roman "successor state" of sorts in Mauretania and/or Africa in the last years of the western empire.

The future of North Africa was definitely Romano-Berber--any powerful state outside of glorified city-state of Carthage would have to incorporate the Berbers somehow. Although maybe the Vandals could have done something. The society of the Vandalic Kingdom continued many traditions of Roman Africa, exemplified in the works of the poet Corippus. The Vandalic Kingdom continued the cultural and economic development of North Africa.
 
If the Palmyrene Empire had a more distinct political structure it might have succeeded for a few centuries. It would have been a buffer between the Romans and the Parthian Empire.
 
I feel like Syagrius's Gaul would be nice. Wedged between the Franks and Visigoths, they would be pretty imteresting to watch
 
I've always been charmed by the idea of Syagrius turning Soissons into something, the butterflies it would mean for Western history would be interesting.
 
Top