WI: Khosrau II does not invade the ERE

Maybe if Maurice's son survived could have ended the hostility between the Empire and the Persians...
According to what i ve read Theodosius was sent to Khosrau II along with Praetorian Prefect Constantine Lardys to seek for his help when revolt broke out. But Maurice made the crucial mistake of recalling him to Constantinople where he was captured by the rebels and executed.
Had he survived and placed to the throne (with persian help) i believe that this would have ended any hostilities between Persians and Romans and Khosrau II would have repaid his debt to Maurice for his aid when he had his own troubles. Theodosius like his father would be the guarantee for a cease-fire.
 
That seems likely.

Indeed. An interesting question is what becomes of Zoroastrianism. I think that with the time to go onto the defensive Zoroastrianism would fall back and become more of a missionary religion, perhaps turn the war against the 'Kingdom of the lie', once represented by Rome and the thieving nomad, to turn into that of the Muslim Caliphate, and indeed all heretics. With the divine reputation of the king damaged by this defeat I can see the Priests gaining much more power as it turns into a battle of religions.
 
- The Empire may very well be split into Eastern and Western portions, given Maurice seems to have intended to make his second son Tiberius Emperor of the West, as well as giving his other sons some small parts of land. I suspect, however, due to the relative youth of the sons at the time, that only Theodosius and Tiberius will be able to take effective control. A civil war at some stage wouldn't surprise me, in which Theodosius will almost certainly come out on top of.

*snip*

- At some stage or another, religious problems will have to be dealt with. Maurice's general policy was, IIRC, to be generally tolerant, whilst coming down like a tonne of bricks on troublemakers. Whether this will really be tenable for Theodosius is debatable, given the dependence of the Roman economy on Monophysite Egypt. I would guess that a compromise doctrine will have to be worked out at some stage or another, and to do so, the Papacy will have to be antagonised. Which could mean a Papal rebellion against the Emperor...

Might these two events end up linked? The Eastern half ends up compomising with the Monophysites, the Western backs the Pope?
 
Indeed. An interesting question is what becomes of Zoroastrianism. I think that with the time to go onto the defensive Zoroastrianism would fall back and become more of a missionary religion, perhaps turn the war against the 'Kingdom of the lie', once represented by Rome and the thieving nomad, to turn into that of the Muslim Caliphate, and indeed all heretics. With the divine reputation of the king damaged by this defeat I can see the Priests gaining much more power as it turns into a battle of religions.

A holy war between the first caliphate and a Zoroastrian empire? Intriguing.
 
Top