WI: Longer Lived Emperor Theodosius?

There was no set rule in the matter. Iirc Constantine's eldest son got the Gallic Prefecture. And Valentinian I took the West while his younger brother Valens got the East.
More importantly, when Theodosius received the east he was the junior emperor to Gratian. It really wasn't set, it was just wherever the senior emperor happened to be at the time.
 
And for destroying the Western Empire's army and leaving it in a shit state when he died.Not to mention,he fathered two of some of the most useless pieces of shit to have ever graced the imperial throne.It's bad luck when your heir is crap,but when both of them are equally as trash as Arcadius and Honorius?

Is there actually any direct evidence that the Frigidus "destroyed" the Western army? IIRC the evidence generally given is that the West was unable to hold the line against the Germans in 405, but the Empire had had difficulty keeping barbarians out before -- their performance during the Gothic War of 376-82 was pretty crap, for example.
 
Is there actually any direct evidence that the Frigidus "destroyed" the Western army? IIRC the evidence generally given is that the West was unable to hold the line against the Germans in 405, but the Empire had had difficulty keeping barbarians out before -- their performance during the Gothic War of 376-82 was pretty crap, for example.
According to Ian Hughes's book on Stilicho, "It is likely that the losses suffered during the three battles battles of Siscia, Poetovio, and Frigidus were greater than those suffered by the Eastern Empire at Adrianople."

In any case, there is circumstantial evidence to believe this to be the case. After 395, the strategy in the west was always to avoid a pitched battle at all costs. First Stilicho, then Constantius, then Aetius, all made sure a major pitched battle was a last resort. They could not afford the losses at that point. Stilicho would not have stripped the Rhine frontier for the central field army in Italy if the losses during the two civil wars had not had that much of an impact. Nor would he have made such an effort to take the whole of the Illyricum Prefecture from the east if he wasn't desperate for the prime recruiting grounds there. Consider that before this Gratian believed the west to be in a sufficient state to transfer the Illyricum Prefecture over to eastern administration. It wasn't seen as necessary to the west then, but by Stilicho's time it's recruiting grounds were of prime importance.
 
According to Ian Hughes's book on Stilicho, "It is likely that the losses suffered during the three battles battles of Siscia, Poetovio, and Frigidus were greater than those suffered by the Eastern Empire at Adrianople."

In any case, there is circumstantial evidence to believe this to be the case. After 395, the strategy in the west was always to avoid a pitched battle at all costs. First Stilicho, then Constantius, then Aetius, all made sure a major pitched battle was a last resort. They could not afford the losses at that point. Stilicho would not have stripped the Rhine frontier for the central field army in Italy if the losses during the two civil wars had not had that much of an impact. Nor would he have made such an effort to take the whole of the Illyricum Prefecture from the east if he wasn't desperate for the prime recruiting grounds there. Consider that before this Gratian believed the west to be in a sufficient state to transfer the Illyricum Prefecture over to eastern administration. It wasn't seen as necessary to the west then, but by Stilicho's time it's recruiting grounds were of prime importance.

Multiple battles could have a bad effect, I suppose -- though most people tend not to mention Siscia and Poetovia, and just talk about the Frigidus instead. Though in fairness to Theodosius, it's not his fault that the West kept throwing up usurpers during this period. From the way some people talk about him, you'd think he killed Western soldiers just for the lols.
 
Though in fairness to Theodosius, it's not his fault that the West kept throwing up usurpers during this period. From the way some people talk about him, you'd think he killed Western soldiers just for the lols.

I'm curious though were the wars inevitable? Could Theodosius have just recognized either Maximus or Eugenius?
 
Multiple battles could have a bad effect, I suppose -- though most people tend not to mention Siscia and Poetovia, and just talk about the Frigidus instead. Though in fairness to Theodosius, it's not his fault that the West kept throwing up usurpers during this period. From the way some people talk about him, you'd think he killed Western soldiers just for the lols.
Well to be fair, Valentinian II very likely *did* kill himself, and despite Arbogast's repeated pleading that he was not stupid enough to kill the emperor and start a civil war, Theodosius marched west anyway.

The second civil war really wasn't Arbogast's fault.
 
Last edited:
I'm curious though were the wars inevitable? Could Theodosius have just recognized either Maximus or Eugenius?

Not really. Caving in to rebellions sets a bad precedent for any government. That goes double for one which isn't very stable to begin with, and triple for one where success in war is seen as a mark of imperial legitimacy.

Well to be fair, Valentinian II very likely *did* kill himself, and despite Arbogast's repeated pleading that he was not stupid enough to kill the emperor and start a civil war, Theodosius marched west anyway.

The second civil war really wasn't Arbogast's fault.

Even if Valentinian did kill himself, Arbogast's treatment of him probably played a large role in that, so he's not entirely innocent on that score. Plus, appointing his own Emperor was always going to make civil war likely, if not inevitable -- as mentioned above, just acquiescing in what was essentially a usurpation would have been very damaging both to Roman internal stability and to Theodosius' own position.
 
So with a longer reign theodosius might be able to deastroy the goths once and for all? Cool. So how would the empire likely stand at the time of theodosius new death?
 
Huh? Who said this?
IOTL,there was a joint campaign by the two empires under Stilicho against the Goths.The campaign was close to success when Rufinus had the eastern army recalled.The eastern army was so pissed that when they returned,they immediately had Rufinus lynched.Not saying the would be wiped out,but the goths will likely be subjugated to much closer Roman control than before as opposed to being an autonomous group inside the empire after Adrianople.
 
Last edited:
Huh? Who said this?
IOTL,there was a joint campaign by the two empires under Stilicho against the Goths.The campaign was close to success when Rufinus had the eastern army recalled.The eastern army was so pissed that when they returned,they immediately had Rufinus lynched.Not saying the would be wiped out,but the goths will likely be subjugated to much closer Roman control than before as opposed to being an autonomous group inside the empire after Adrianople.
What @darthfanta said is close enough I guess.
 
IOTL,there was a joint campaign by the two empires under Stilicho against the Goths.The campaign was close to success when Rufinus had the eastern army recalled.The eastern army was so pissed that when they returned,they immediately had Rufinus lynched.Not saying the would be wiped out,but the goths will likely be subjugated to much closer Roman control than before as opposed to being an autonomous group inside the empire after Adrianople.
Stilicho's campaign was a result by moves made by Alaric that were based off the fact that Theodosius was dead. He would be far more cautious to not antagonize Theodosius while he's alive and can bring the forces of the entire empire to bare. Othereise, from Theodosius's perspective, the Goths were not a problem. They loyally fought alongside him at Frigidus. Unless Alaric did something stupid, Theodosius will probably leave him be.
 
Stilicho's campaign was a result by moves made by Alaric that were based off the fact that Theodosius was dead. He would be far more cautious to not antagonize Theodosius while he's alive and can bring the forces of the entire empire to bare. Othereise, from Theodosius's perspective, the Goths were not a problem. They loyally fought alongside him at Frigidus. Unless Alaric did something stupid, Theodosius will probably leave him be.
According to the cynics,Theodosius intentionally let the Goths take the blunt of the casualties at Frigidus.Not sure how true this is,but nonetheless,I don't think any emperor would let such a group be within the empire's borders if they can help it.There most likely will be some more subtle attempts to weaken the Goths without using military means if Theodosius can help it.
 
According to the cynics,Theodosius intentionally let the Goths take the blunt of the casualties at Frigidus.Not sure how true this is,but nonetheless,I don't think any emperor would let such a group be within the empire's borders if they can help it.There most likely will be some more subtle attempts to weaken the Goths without using military means if Theodosius can help it.
Yeah he's probley still bitter that he could never directly defeat the goths when he orginally came to the throne
 
Top