WI: "Aestica", or Roman Balts

So, for those uninitiated, Lithuania has a history of portraying itself and it's nation as successors of Roman culture, most of it happening during the Renaissance. This was done with the legendary Palemonids.

Here is a brief summary of the legend of Palemon, first presented in the Lithuanian Chronicle:

Palemon was a Roman duke and noble, relative of Emperor Nero, who fled the Roman Empire along with 500 patrician families and their followers aboard ships to the Eastern Baltic and then through the Nemunas River, settling down in modern day Ariogala (central Lithuania), creating a state and starting all major Lithuanian noble families.

Here is my idea - what if this sadly made up story actually happened? What if a group of Roman patricians, led by an upstart ambitious leader, fled their nation to settle down in the land of the Balts to carve out a nation in the region? How big would this nation (let's call it "Aestica", after the Roman name for the Baltic tribes - Aesti, for simplicity) be? How long would it last? What effect would it have on the Balts, their culture and society?
 
I'm afraid that, far from their powerbase, far from any possible reinforcements, and probably divided among themselves (altough we could ignore this for the sake of the discussion) and in an at best foreign and strange region, this won't change much.

IIRC, the Eastern Baltic shore was fairly undevelopped, structurally wise : the hill-forts seems to have appeared later and the general region had few basic structures to set up a nation : swamps everywhere, no roads, no urban centers, not much to begin with. Even worse, they couldn't really count on the trade roads to found would it be only an emporion, similar to greek cities in Gaul or Spain, giving the main trade road between Mediterranean basin and Baltic Sea passed along Vistula, not sea.

So, at very best, I'd go for some sort of second-rate emporion near IOTL Kaliningrad, whom inhabitants would certainly quickly be swallowed up culturally and else by the neighbouring Proto-Balto-Slavic peoples. Long story short : it might be quite undiscernable, except with some good old archeological luck (not unlike Roman presence remains in Ireland).
 
I'm afraid that, far from their powerbase, far from any possible reinforcements, and probably divided among themselves (altough we could ignore this for the sake of the discussion) and in an at best foreign and strange region, this won't change much.

IIRC, the Eastern Baltic shore was fairly undevelopped, structurally wise : the hill-forts seems to have appeared later and the general region had few basic structures to set up a nation : swamps everywhere, no roads, no urban centers, not much to begin with. Even worse, they couldn't really count on the trade roads to found would it be only an emporion, similar to greek cities in Gaul or Spain, giving the main trade road between Mediterranean basin and Baltic Sea passed along Vistula, not sea.

So, at very best, I'd go for some sort of second-rate emporion near IOTL Kaliningrad, whom inhabitants would certainly quickly be swallowed up culturally and else by the neighbouring Proto-Balto-Slavic peoples. Long story short : it might be quite undiscernable, except with some good old archeological luck (not unlike Roman presence remains in Ireland).
There weren't any Balto-Slavs by the point of the POD discussed (and their historical existence at all is still debatable, but this forum seems to accept them as fact so I won't touch that), but other than that, I see your point.

The coasts of the Eastern Baltic weren't super undeveloped, though. They were still the starting point of the Amber Road, and archeological evidence points to the region being at least moderately wealthy in comparison to it's surroundings. Which, along with early contact with the Romans, was the reason why the Western Balts split off and formed separate tribes earlier than the East.
 
While still debated (giving we're talking about proto-historic peoples, it's only fair, especially giving the lack of sources), its seems that Bronze Age cultures of the region are part of the Corded Ware (largely accepted as at least largely IEzed) horizon or legacy such as Baltic Battle Axe or Middle Dniepr, even if the Hunger-Gatherer resurgence may have been important in the former which may have lead to a more porous contact with non-IE peoples in northern Baltic (especially Proto-Finnish peoples that gave birth later to Livonians, Estonians, etc.) which we know have shared some features with their southern neighbours.

From there, there is little interruption for what matter obvious cultural changes.

The names that Ptolemy gives to Baltic peoples are to be taken cautiously, but seem to have Proto-Baltic-Slavic roots.

So I'm not sure about your affirmation about them never having existed : is it a matter of classification, do you think Baltic and Slavic groups while related never formed any closer ensemble, or else?
Now, I think we can agree that Balts or Slavs as such didn't existed yet at this point : hence why I said "Proto-Balto-Slav" in order to point a period where they were still largely undifferenciated in my opinion (I hypotheised, in another thread, that Sarmatian presence may be one of the factors of said differenciation).

But I digress.

The coasts of the Eastern Baltic weren't super undeveloped, though. They were still the starting point of the Amber Road, and archeological evidence points to the region being at least moderately wealthy in comparison to it's surroundings.
I mostly agree : my point wasn't to say the region waspiss poor, but structurally undeveloped to Romans, even compared to Germania Magna.
I'm not specialist on the trade network of Ancient Baltic tough : but my understanding was that this trade was essentially made by land, which mean avoiding most of Baltic region itself safe for Vistula mouth.

As you asked for a Roman presence in the land of Aesti (which could admittedly means anyone living along the Baltic as much Tacitus was concerned) and especially among peoples that would eventually give birth to Lithuanians, I assumed (maybe wrongly) you didn't meant a region with a more or less important Germanic presence. That said, I gladly concede you may have been considering Proto-Prusians peoples as well.

Still, you don't build a nation out of quasi-nothing : even Greek colonists in western Mediterranean reached shores were urban society existed (if a really early and simplified way) on which their trade and political network could develop (and never hugely successfully so).
These Romans could probably pull out an emporia thanks to Amber Road (and possibly salt too), but would be too far from Rome and Mediterranea to hope for economical/cultural/political reinforcement in face of a more numerous people who, as you said justly, were fairly wealthy and with the resources to prevent an handful of isoled newcomers to take the lead.

Which, along with early contact with the Romans, was the reason why the Western Balts split off and formed separate tribes earlier than the East.
It's a possibility, but I don't think it was the main factor, mostly because you have too few (if existing) exemples and clues to Roman influence in the region contrary to other parts of the trade road : remember this was a trade by proxy, meaning the main direct influence Proto-Balto-Slavs recieved at this point may have been Germanic (Celtized then Romanized to an extend, I'd agree).

I'd tend to think that the climatic then social changes of the IIIrd century did more directly for that (as Sarmatian presence may have dealth with the growing differenciation between Slavs and Balts, IMO).

I don't think that the existing, but quite weak, Roman influence along the Baltic would have been nearly enough to be a support for these exiled Romans. At very best, I'd go with something similar to Hiberno-Normans emporioi in Ireland, going native in a matter of generations.
 
So I'm not sure about your affirmation about them never having existed : is it a matter of classification, do you think Baltic and Slavic groups while related never formed any closer ensemble, or else?
I never said I don't follow the Balto-Slavic origin hypothesis, in fact I consider it one of the more likely candidates for being true, but that's what it is - a hypothesis. There were and still are researchers who proclaim different ideas for the relative similarity between the Baltic and Slavic language groups, be it intense linguistic contact or the Slavs being an offshoot of the Balts.

Really, considering how sparse the information is on the history of the Balts before the High Middle Ages, pretty much anything goes in this field.

The rest of the post I can agree with. Really, I just proposed this POD as a thought experiment.
 
Just to be on the safe side : it was a perfectly genuine question. I know that for such fields, it's hard to be entierly sure, and one should be cautious as there's a possibility to be disproven.
As for the tough experiment, I mostly tried to be as genuinly open as I can, but while it can have microhistorical importance (think earlier distinction from Proto-Prusians, or maybe a greater germanic influence east of Vistula), I'm not sure it would even show archeologically.
 
Just to be on the safe side : it was a perfectly genuine question. I know that for such fields, it's hard to be entierly sure, and one should be cautious as there's a possibility to be disproven.
As for the tough experiment, I mostly tried to be as genuinly open as I can, but while it can have microhistorical importance (think earlier distinction from Proto-Prusians, or maybe a greater germanic influence east of Vistula), I'm not sure it would even show archeologically.
I think that if Roman coins, pottery and treasures from that period can be found around the Baltics, an entire settlement, no matter how short-lived, would definitely leave a trace. Maybe not with actual full-blown remains, but if they bring masonry, iron tools and other stuff that's more advanced than everything that's found in the region in that period, then such anachronistic discoveries could definitely point to a Roman settlement in Baltic territory.

While the real-life Palemon might not leave a big direct legacy, the cultural impact of such a discovery ("we had Romans live in our territory!") would definitely reach the Lithuanians.
 
Point taken. I must admit I'm not much knowledgable about archeological matters in Baltic sea and Lithuania : how much does the local geological/biological context helps or impairs archeological conservation? For exemple, archeological finds on a march that recovred the emporia may be more probable.

That said, I'm not too sure about an entiere settlement being retrived or immediatly identified as Roman : such exiles would have access to less immediatly avaible materials they were used to (I'm especially thinking of a lack of direct quarries, making the emporia largely reliant in wood, IMO).

But, yeah, I agree it would certainly have a modern-day interest.
 
Right, so numbers - 500 Patrician Familes and followers - lets be generous. 2 adults and 3 children per patrician family, and at least 3 servants/followers - gives us 500 x 8 is ~4000 people.

That is not an insubstantial population, and whilst I disagree with the specified location, I think a settlement emerging near the coast - near or on the Neman Delta (I'm thinking the landmass trapped between the Skirvyte and Neman rivers. Whilst not a small landmass, it is arable (if you can figure out how), defensible as it is surrounded by river, and a good place for a fleet to be based.

Which leads me to point 2 - How many boats do these people have? It must have been a substantial fleet. I'd guess ~100 at least for the people and food that would be coming along. That gives a bunch of wood for the initial construction - but Lithuanians wood supply is substantial, so those ships don't need to be scuttled for wood.

Now I'd expect these families to be more inclined to be martial than labourers, so expect some conflict that enslaves some locals - which could very well lead to them being wiped out - OR for them to be useful allies and build a place in the local political landscape. Either way, agriculture is the job of the followers, and locals under their protection.

Beyond that, Rich People in Exile still want to be rich. So what do you do? You have a significant fleet, have somehow figured out how to sail from the Empire to the Baltic Sea, and are now sitting on the heart of the Amber trade - so many of those ships are going to become amber traders. I don't think the overland route will be able to compete with the oversea route if I'm honest, which hurts many of the economies on the Amber Road - and the locals, rather than travel overland can just sell the Amber to the Aesticans.

It'll be cold, harsh, and unless they figure out how to farm there they'll either live on fish or starve - but if they can solve that problem, and establish themselves militarily, I can see them being the heart of the bad fiction of Gaul reprinted. Rather than co-opting the Gallic road system, they build their own. If it is functional, I can also see it as the perfect place in the mind of the Roman Empire to send criminals and exiles. New Romans are useful, and the two are far enough away that neither can realistically threaten the other - meanwhile the Aesticans can build a Romano-Baltic state on the far side of Germania Magna.

This would have some very weird effects on an alt-migration period (if such a thing happens), as whilst the Huns go south and raid the Romans, they may consider the Aesticans as unimportant - all the while those tribes that would have been based in the Baltics and migrated towards the Empire, aren't. Having a larger trade partner to the east of Germania may also lead to stronger coalition in the East Germanies to resist, allied with the Aesticans. In this (somewhat rosey) hypothetical, we could see no fall of the West or the East, but instead the consolidation of the Western Empire in OTL boundaries, a solid Germania, Aestica becoming an alternative to the Poland-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Eastern Empire controlling the Carpathian Basin, and some polity that sets itself up in the Ukraine.
 
While RogueTraderEnthusiast`s scenario is fascinating, I still have a problem with the OP.
Roman elites leaving Rome for some exile, OK, I get that, that happened a few times, why not once more.
What I don`t get is why they`d go to Aestica, and even if they`re stranded there, why they wouldn`t want to go back in the end.
If you`re a Roman aristocrat, and you had problems back in Rome, even if your life is threatened, you`d still want to lead as much of a life in luxury and civilization as possible, and you´d try to live off the skills you have - which are not in agriculture, fishing, lumbering etc., but in political machinations and in impressing people with your vast classical knowledge and your refined manners. That´s why I see Roman expats around that time going into one of the Mesopotamian kingdoms maybe (Osrhoene, Adiabene, ...) or straight to the Parthians, or into Armenia, or maybe to the Bosporan Kingdom. Hell, even Dacia sounds a more likely candidate. A royal court where they can try to find a place for themselves, and where they can hope to gain control over military forces with which to return one day in the next round of civil war in Rome and overthrow whoever drove them away.
Not some sparsely populated cold barren place far away from any baths, paved streets, or even stone houses, where they don`t even have proper local despots whom you could manipulate in your favour.

If these Roman aristocrats get stranded in Aestica and stay there, they´re not behaving like Roman aristocrats. You could take this anywhere, but it won`t get plausible.

What you COULD plausibly do, I think, but I´m not sure, is to quantitatively and qualitative improve trade relations with the wider Roman world. As has been said, amber trade IOTL went overland and thus through many different middlemen. Redirecting it overseas could not only speed things up (making more goods tradeable), but also cut out a few middlemen. If you can make it across the Baltic Sea, the Kattegat and the North Sea to Roman Batavia and the mouth of the Rhine, you`re where you want to be.

What you`d probably want for that to happen is a slightly better Roman-influenced Iutian grip over the Sund and the rest of the Kattegat against piracy. Is amber enough for that to happen, though? Or does the region have anything else to offer that provincial Romans in the West might want?

Where would you get with increased Roman contact of that sort?
You´d probably start off a process of warlordisation which would transform the maritime Baltic peoples into behaving like the Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and Frisians, i.e. going off into foreign lands for raids, settlement and ultimately limited conquest, and later maybe even a native alt-Viking culture, for which the Balts, to be honest, are as likely a candidate as the North Germanic peoples, had it not been for the absence of this warlordisation impulse in the early centuries CE.
Presumably, i.e. based only on the limited archeological finds that we have, these centuries were a relatively calm period in what is now the Baltic peoples` realm. Increased Roman contact would make it less so.
 
Is amber enough for that to happen, though? Or does the region have anything else to offer that provincial Romans in the West might want?
I believe amber is enough for that to happen. Baltic amber was considered to be very valuable and used for jewelry and ornaments as far back as Ancient Egypt and the Mycenae.

and later maybe even a native alt-Viking culture, for which the Balts, to be honest, are as likely a candidate as the North Germanic peoples, had it not been for the absence of this warlordisation impulse in the early centuries CE.
They are in fact so likely to form an alt-Viking culture that they did so in OTL. Albeit slighly later than the North Germanic peoples. The Curonians are mentioned in Scandinavian sagas as raiders and colonizers as far back as the Sigurdr Ring Saga in the 7th-8th centuries, and the Lithuanians famously pillaged across Northeast Europe in the 12th and 13th centuries, which later led into the Grand Duchy of Lithuania.

Great insights! Looks like the original legend of Palemon wasn't very likely to have succeeded at all.
 
Whether Baltic amber is actually worth the expense of conquering *Denmark, it provides a good excuse. :) Also, if the goods are traveling up the Rhine to get to Italy, it provides more incentive to pacify the Germans on the east bank of the Rhine...

This could have all sorts of knock-ons/butterflies.

Pity it's so improbable (for reasons pointed out by others).
 
Top