While Atilla himself is famously known as the "Scourge of God" and the woe of the Romans, what happened after his death is not as famous. The Hunnic Empire didn't last very long after Atilla's death, finally dissolving and dispersing after a power struggle between his different children. What if one son was able to assert power, perhaps Dengizich, who seemed to the most competent, and killed the other sons quickly. Subsequently, with more resources, he is able to enact a brutal reprisal against the rebelling Gepids, and keeps the empire together. What would be the impact? Can it survive long enough to share in the fall of Western Rome? How would it impact the Ostrogoths? How would it affect the ERE? How does this affect the steppe? How does this affect Sassanid Persia/
WI: Hunnic empire survives?
- Thread starter SunKing105
- Start date
-
- Tags
- atilla hunnic empire huns
pod huns win the battle of nedao but the brothers die there or shortly after Dengizich is left with throne if he is smart he knows that attacking any roman empire would be suicide
maybe with the huns around Valentinian is not an idiot and doesnt kill aetius which with the huns blodied by him and attila invasion meant that he could pull of a majorian earlier and be more successful as for persia this period was due to the whole migration things surprisingly peaceful in terms of roman persian wars from 400 to 502 there was only two short wars each lasting less than year
maybe with the huns around Valentinian is not an idiot and doesnt kill aetius which with the huns blodied by him and attila invasion meant that he could pull of a majorian earlier and be more successful as for persia this period was due to the whole migration things surprisingly peaceful in terms of roman persian wars from 400 to 502 there was only two short wars each lasting less than year
Only Ellac was present at the battle, and he did die IOTL. IMO by Nedao it's too late, the Germanic peoples have already begun rebellion in large numbers and the power struggle has wrecked it's damage on the empire. As for Aetius, Valentinian was fatally incompetent, and he might still attempt to do the deed. Even if it doesn't go through, Aetius was highly suspected, I think he will fall victim to the various intrigues in the court of Ravenna eventually. And how does a fatally incompetent emperor who killed his best general IOTL pull a "Majorian"?
I know this one: he doesn’t. And not because he is incompetent but because there was not need to. The only reasons Majorian had to “pull a Majorian” in the first place, was because the empire was falling apart after Valentinian’s death. Without his death Avitus won’t rise to power, and without his rise to power you won’t even see his deposition. A deposition that was seen as the last straw by the Galic aristocracy that had supported him and now was considering to break away from the empire. Also without Avitus you won’t have the Goths in Hispania (fighting there on the order of Avitus himself). Really the empire is better off with Valentinianus still alive. Even with Aetius dead I’m sure his successor would just take over his plan for a new campaign against the Vandals. And without Valentinian’s assassination there is a high chance that that man would be Majorian himself, first as commander of the army and then as emperor himself.
you can have them join or at least one of them so that they die also Nedao is not that quite late had Ellac won his claim to the throne would have been the strongest by a lot ,
as for pulling a majorian i was refering to aetuis not valentinian as for pulling a majorian aetius would have it easier because he is not dealing with the bs that occured post valentinian III death , leading to a stabler west , but yeah he can be still killed because valentinian was incompetent but it could be later and majorian could very well be the next succesor .
Last edited:
Perhaps you could have a 'Rus' Russian based empire, with power bases in the volga, Dnieper and Don.
I imagine, for such the Hunnic empire to stay established, it does a 'Rus' and converts to Orthodox christianity. A 'Rus' based empire, would further envigorate the Causucs proxy wars
I This is of course very broad and vague, with no actual timeline or POD.
The Hunnic Empire relied pretty heavily on Germanic auxiliaries for administration and consolidation of power in the areas close to the Roman frontier. In my view, this was ultimately their undoing because these groups were inevitably going to see that the Hunnic system was not going to get them what they wanted, which was arable farmland reasonably secure from attack, or offices in the Roman state. The Ostrogoths went the latter route, and other groups the former, but the point is that the Huns regardless of their prowess were overstretched. The Hunnic Empire was far more sustainable in the Eurasian steppe and could have persisted there I think for a long time. Classical civilizations still had the wealth to keep them happy in a raiding/tribute providing role, the topography was ideal for their way of life, and the lines of trade and communication were not as bad as one may think.
The biggest problem that faces all nomadic empires is figuring out succession and the transition from being a conquest society to a post-conquest society. The Huns did neither.
The biggest problem that faces all nomadic empires is figuring out succession and the transition from being a conquest society to a post-conquest society. The Huns did neither.
Last edited:
I would not describe the Germanic affiliates as auxiliaries. From what I understand of Gothic myth surrounding the Huns, it would seem that the Gepids and others affiliated them, likely unnamed and unknown Germanic and Scythic peoples, were not just subordinates of the Huns, but partners in empire. The Huns and their affiliates expanded with more opportunistic or subjugated peoples indeed, but these folk were not only united by Hunnic power, but by a greater impetus.
That impetus has been discussed by some authors not as something arising in the Hunnic camp alone, but in a general trend in Northern and Eastern Europe (of which the Huns were a part of, they were not a people arose from Mars as is sometimes felt in the public consciousness). That being that across the Roman borders, the Germanic and similar folk were of differing views and relation tot he Roman empire, some of whom wished to curry favor with Rome and viewed the Empire as the 'Great Kingdom.' They sought to enter into Rome and rule over it as allies with the Great King and institute fair trade and relations as well as serve in its armies. Others wanted simply to loot, plunder and remain above these affairs. However on the other end, a definite side wished to subjugate the Roman empire into a tributary realm and reformulate the hegemonic status in Europe from Rome to another realm across the Danube-Rhine. In this sense, the Hunnic empire formed the critical and formal declaration of the latter, acting as the primary anti-Roman power in Europe and advocating in favor of its vassals and itself as a realm in opposition to perceived Roman hegemony.
In that endeavor, the Gepids were definitely co-rulers. They sought to acquire land in the Roman empire and presumably, to acquire loot and pillage that would be provided for by the wider Hunnic tribute system that would have tentacles across Europe. Other groups, such as the Thuringians and Saxons also benefit, in that they operate as beneficiaries of the Hunnic elites and recipients of the bounties of the transition of Rome from a dominant power into one that is ultimately a subservient tributary to a wider network of Hunno-Germanic coalitions across Northern, Central and Eastern Europe.
The reason the Huns however filled the role that allowed them lordship over the Gepids as the 'head' of the coalition, was that the Huns possessed the greatest power and the most centralized form of governance. During the reign of Hunnic king Balamer the Huns may have managed to integrate the Gepids into their coalition and afterward defeated Ermanaric of the Greuthungian Goths, the prior hegemony in the Pontic Steppe. After defeating the Greuthungi, this signal is what permitted the Huns to ascend to the status of the hegemony in Northern Europe and begin its process of a wider coalition creation that would lead to the reign of Attila and his great successes. All built on the successes of good coalition building with the Gepids and Goths under Balamer, Huldin, Charadon, Oktar, Ruga and then Attila. Once this power was gone, the Gepids had no reason to follow the Huns, nor did the Heruli and others. It would seem that only the Ostrogoths and the Thuringians remained relatively loyal to the Hunnic hegemony up to Nedao and then after, the Huns were unable to maintain their nominal coalition with the Ostrogoths. Afterward, it seems that what remnants of the Hunnic nobility that remained, migrated to and assimilated into the Thuringian kingdom which was reaching its height at the time and was in accordance with the Hunnic hegemony until the very end.
To maintain the Hunnic hegemony, we must remove the succession crisis early. Then, we need the Huns to engage in bloodletting. That is, the Huns must fight someone and win, ideally that is an enemy people, such as the Eastern Empire alongside the Heruli, Gepids and so forth. If they can win this time and restore some legitimacy, they may can maintain their hegemony, ruling as overlords over the region from their base in the Pannonian grasslands.
Their empire would be one of them seated in Pannonia as the ideal masters of the varied coalition under their command. The Amal Goths ruling Dalmatia, the Thuringians ruling the lands to the northeast, namely southern Saxony and Bohemia, the Heruli ruling Austria proper, the Suevii ruling in Carinthia, the Scrii ruling in the southern sectors of Poland, the Gepids ruling the length of the Danube south of Panonia as the great vassals of the Huns and the Lombards and Rugians ruling as affiliates with the Thuringia north of their central parts. Such a Hunnic empire will be very strong in my opinion if it continues to attack enemies on all sides constantly and maintains a constant stream of redistributed loot.
At best, such an empire could become very similar to the Arsacid Confederacy of Iran. With the different Germanic coalition members acting as Great House like powers and the empire otherwise focused on looting the West, South and East and maintaining legitimacy in the form of loot, pillage and battle prowess.
i think a better anaologue for the empire of the huns in panonia would be the avar khaganate its slavic vassals which as showed was a pain to the eastern romans and where resistant enougth that the byzantine empire marched an army to their territory and beat them but as said the slavic migrations would occur and the avars migth also arrive to the region in the 6th century disturbing the balance of power from the huns it could be like the white huns
with the romans and avars destroying the hunic empire
Last edited:
The reason that I prefer the model that I mentioned is that it could be a more long lasting system to work with. The Hunnic empire acting as an army with an empire alongside similar armies. Ultimately in the long run, the Huns and the Germanic vassals will move towards a symbiotic Germanic culture of which the Hunnic royalty will be the foremost in bloodline and fame.
well to be fair the avar khagante lasted about 3 centuries of course the later was terminal decline and no power nearly by to put it out of its misery but still , what the diference would be is treatmen if roman sources are to be belived the slavs where treated very poorly by the avar khagante but that just migth have been the khagan forcing new tribute for the expense of the siege of constantinple as there is more evidence of a partership from them and the avar royalty adopting slavic culture to some extend but as mentioned
when the slavs do come would the huns intrigrate them or massacre them so they dont settle?
Have Attila become an Arian Christian and his Empire gradually Germanifying.
In order for The Hunnic Empire to survive, there would need to be a clear line of succession. The Huns would would have also needed to win battles like the Battle of Nedao to reestablish dominance over the land. Attila would have to not die when he did or start establishing that succession line sooner to keep the empire stable.
Any thoughts on what happens if the Hunnic Empire is still around when the Avars arrive in Europe? Do they overthrow it or become absorbed into it?