WI : Magnus Maximus accepted simply "Emperor of Britain"

As title really.

In OTL he was Emperor in Britain and Gaul, but what is Theodosius had managed to make a different deal.

In exchange for an alliance, and of course Gaul - Theodosius gave Magnus Maximum Britain, and until such time as he could establish British Legions, lent him Roman Legions, and any Legionnaires who wished to reside in Britain.

With an effectively independent Britain, with strong Roman connections, what is the future of Britain? Is it just a very Roman country on the periphery? Or do we see it get deeply involved in continental affairs?

Would we see Foedi in Britain? Perhaps importing Allemani, or making Foedi out of Picts/Gaels?
 
His soldiers murder him, put someone else on the shield, march on the Rome, and get defeated. Britain is simply not rich enough to meet the rapacious demands of mutinying soldiers.

Plus, I don't think Roman Britain alone can sustain an empire, not to mention that it is a very exposed province with enemies from 3 sides (Ireland, the Picts, and the Saxons).
 
His soldiers murder him, put someone else on the shield, march on the Rome, and get defeated. Britain is simply not rich enough to meet the rapacious demands of mutinying soldiers.

Plus, I don't think Roman Britain alone can sustain an empire, not to mention that it is a very exposed province with enemies from 3 sides (Ireland, the Picts, and the Saxons).

With an effectively independent Britain, with strong Roman connections, what is the future of Britain? Is it just a very Roman country on the periphery? Or do we see it get deeply involved in continental affairs?

Furthermore, Roman Britain saw itself as Roman, in the Colonia that is. This means that the towns and cities all bought into the idea of Rome, and so would have been opposed to an independent Britain because, they were Romans not Britons.
 
His soldiers murder him, put someone else on the shield, march on the Rome, and get defeated. Britain is simply not rich enough to meet the rapacious demands of mutinying soldiers.

Plus, I don't think Roman Britain alone can sustain an empire, not to mention that it is a very exposed province with enemies from 3 sides (Ireland, the Picts, and the Saxons).

To be fair, they've probably gathered a fair bit of loot, I think the idea is they'd be accepted back as T's troops if they wanted to.

So if we do see him get killed - what if Theodosius simply says "British Strongmen, have fun" - as you said, Britain isn't that great a prize for Theodosius. Could he simply establish a Comtes/Dux Britannorum and say, right - if you want it, its yours. Here is a tribute/stipend/float, you agree to be the ally of Rome, and we'll agree not to invade Britainnia/Hibernia? (Theodosius' rational being that he can make more in trade fees and savings on stationing Legions in Britain rather than elsewhere (say Persia, or Germania).

Who'd be there to take that offer?

@IamtheEmps - understood, but if the very Empire they buy into the idea of agrees to it, what do they do? Just up sticks and go home? What did they do when Roman authority started to degrade in Britain anyway?
 
understood, but if the very Empire they buy into the idea of agrees to it, what do they do? Just up sticks and go home? What did they do when Roman authority started to degrade in Britain anyway?

If you are saying that they remain within the empire, and Magnus becomes a Co-Emperor of a small area, then okay they would be fine. However I dont see why Theodosius would just let Britain be free. Because the Issue of Britain is that it was unproductive and poor, but had to be defended, because it falling to "barbarians" would be too damaging to the prestige of an emperor. Remember this is shortly after the Gothic War, it would be too bad for prestige for them to just release a part of the empire.
 
Furthermore, Roman Britain saw itself as Roman, in the Colonia that is. This means that the towns and cities all bought into the idea of Rome, and so would have been opposed to an independent Britain because, they were Romans not Britons.
Actually, I don't think neither Magnus Maximus nor the Romano-Britons would see it as the formation of independent Britain, just an extraordinary amount of autonomy (which, considering that this was near the end of the Roman presence on Britain, might just be de jure confirmation of de facto). It's not like Magnus is suddenly calling himself Macsen Wledig or something, and his authority is conferred by the Emperor of Rome.

Of course, whether Roman Britain has a resource and time to actually maintain the Roman institution is questionable...
 
Some sources suggest that the foundation of Armorica / Brittany was down to soldiers from Magnus' armies. It wouldn't take too much flapping of butterflies to have these soldiers base themselves in Britannia (Cornwall?) rather than Gaul. Possibly providing Magnus with a safe haven if he falls out with the other Emperors?
 
If you are saying that they remain within the empire, and Magnus becomes a Co-Emperor of a small area, then okay they would be fine. However I dont see why Theodosius would just let Britain be free. Because the Issue of Britain is that it was unproductive and poor, but had to be defended, because it falling to "barbarians" would be too damaging to the prestige of an emperor. Remember this is shortly after the Gothic War, it would be too bad for prestige for them to just release a part of the empire.

I think A Repentant Heretic may have the more likely institutional arrangement. Nominally in the Empire, but practically independent in all but name.

Actually, I don't think neither Magnus Maximus nor the Romano-Britons would see it as the formation of independent Britain, just an extraordinary amount of autonomy (which, considering that this was near the end of the Roman presence on Britain, might just be de jure confirmation of de facto). It's not like Magnus is suddenly calling himself Macsen Wledig or something, and his authority is conferred by the Emperor of Rome.

Of course, whether Roman Britain has a resource and time to actually maintain the Roman institution is questionable...

I think the key is that it'd certainly have to transform itself. How do you do Roman Legions with British Resources? Do you change up the equipment, replacing the armour with something like gambeson (I have no idea if the Romans used an equivalent, google suggests no and I imagine it'd be unpleasantly hot in the Med.) with some forces using chain over the top if it can be afforded. This probably works quite well since Britain has some iron mining, but quite a lot more sheep, and would streamline the cost of any army, and probably keep the troops warmer. (Naivety Alarm Intensifies). Plus, Gambeson-making industry means jobs! Woo! :p

Some sources suggest that the foundation of Armorica / Brittany was down to soldiers from Magnus' armies. It wouldn't take too much flapping of butterflies to have these soldiers base themselves in Britannia (Cornwall?) rather than Gaul. Possibly providing Magnus with a safe haven if he falls out with the other Emperors?

That would be interesting. Magnus essentially Retreating to Britain, and being left to rot? It is a different PoD, but I like it.
 
Feudalism, basically. If you don't have money, you pay soldiers with lands.

Didn't the Theme system do something similar to land-payments? It doesn't have to be Feudalism explicitly. Settlement and rental of land being the main factors there could be enough to offset the wages. Especially if you've streamlined the costs on the soldiers themselves. It is early, but if done well you could have soldiers who effectively are part of the supply chain for the army - sheep herders, with weaving wives that make and sell gambesons.

The image of a "Quilted British Cataphract" is an interesting image, especially if they were patterned differently 'Theme' to 'Theme'.
 
The largest problem is the most Romanized areas are the most exposed to the Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and Frisians. If those areas fall, the remaining areas to the west are more tribal and the budding state begins to collapse.
 
The largest problem is the most Romanized areas are the most exposed to the Angles, Saxons, Jutes, and Frisians. If those areas fall, the remaining areas to the west are more tribal and the budding state begins to collapse.
I think that so long as the can hold the severn basin + the west country&cornwall, they can survive
 
Do you change up the equipment, replacing the armour with something like gambeson (I have no idea if the Romans used an equivalent, google suggests no and I imagine it'd be unpleasantly hot in the Med.)

The closest thing i can think of is the subarmalis, but thats a bit more like the thinner gambesons that were used under plate. They were meant just to provide enough cushion so the armor wasn't so unbearable to wear.

They weren't something to be worn as armor itself
 
My opinion regarding the Domain of Britain:

From what I can get, Roman Britain was relatively undeveloped compared to continental provinces, with most of the cities, and thus Romanization, concentrated on the southeast. To make Britain stay 'Roman', it must hold onto the more Romanized southeast. Cities are intricately linked with the Roman institution and lifestyle, and losing that, any 'Roman' government of Britain would quickly fall and replaced with Briton one.

In the end, I think there would be 3 classes of soldiers:
1) General Levy: Pretty much anyone who can wield arms, so your typical medieval peasant rabbles. Generally in very poor quality and deployed only in defense, and only in desperation. Since the peasants, and pretty much the whole economy, is dependent on harvest, neither the peasants or magnates would be keen on levying them, and most peasants would be too poor for it anyway.
- 1) Limitanei: It is possible that on the Hadrian's Wall area, and on the Saxon Shore, as well as other places exposed to constant raids from the Irish/Picts/Germans, as well as a possible invasion from continental Romans, some sort of semi-professional, higher quality levies would be formed to man frontier fortifications and coastal/river flotillas, as well as assisting professional soldiers. In spirit (and in blood as well in several areas), they are descendants of Limitanei units.

2) Professional Levy: Formed by well-off and free peasants and city dwellers, as well as small landholders, and retainers and men-at-arms, these are your heavy infantry, light cavalry, and other specialists. These people would have means of equipping themselves or, have wealthy patrons to provide for them, and depending on how powerful the government is, could be provided with some supplementary payments.

3) Landed soldiers: Some form of feudalism is inevitable since Britain doesn't have necessary amounts of cash to pay its soldiers. If the British government are powerful enough, these would resemble Pronoia of the Byzantine Empire, where soldiers are given a right to take a portion of tax for themselves, but not the (inheritable) ownership of the land itself, and must provide fixed numbers of armed retainers during wartime. Of course, if the authority of government weakens, soldiers might take a de facto ownership of the land. These class would be dominated by heavy cavalrymen, as only they could afford the cost of good horses and equipment.

In addition to these, there are going to be Foederati from both the native Britons and the Germans.
 
The closest thing i can think of is the subarmalis, but thats a bit more like the thinner gambesons that were used under plate. They were meant just to provide enough cushion so the armor wasn't so unbearable to wear.

They weren't something to be worn as armor itself


From Ian Heath's book "Armies of the Dark ages" - I have it at home somewhere but at least this bit is available online. He talks about a leather jerkin called a caenet but haven't seen any supporting sources.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...v=onepage&q=sub roman dragon standard&f=false

Also this series partially reprinted from Wargames Illustrated may be useful (usual health warning about wargamers as historians - but Guy Halsall is a proper historian)

https://darkagewargaming.wordpress....st-roman-britain-for-the-historical-wargamer/

https://www.york.ac.uk/history/staff/profiles/halsall/
 
My opinion regarding the Domain of Britain:

From what I can get, Roman Britain was relatively undeveloped compared to continental provinces, with most of the cities, and thus Romanization, concentrated on the southeast. To make Britain stay 'Roman', it must hold onto the more Romanized southeast. Cities are intricately linked with the Roman institution and lifestyle, and losing that, any 'Roman' government of Britain would quickly fall and replaced with Briton one.

I think the establishment of a Romano-Briton/Romano-Cumbric/Romano-Cymric state is largely inevitable. Unlike the Greeks of Alexanders day, they aren't a large population of soldiers with that expectation on them. As a result, I think you're likely to see the 'adoption' or 'promotion' of more friendly clans to effectively the status of nearly-Roman, to outright equals in time, if only so that those groups can expand the manpower available to the Domain.

In the end, I think there would be 3 classes of soldiers:
1) General Levy: Pretty much anyone who can wield arms, so your typical medieval peasant rabbles. Generally in very poor quality and deployed only in defense, and only in desperation. Since the peasants, and pretty much the whole economy, is dependent on harvest, neither the peasants or magnates would be keen on levying them, and most peasants would be too poor for it anyway.
- 1) Limitanei: It is possible that on the Hadrian's Wall area, and on the Saxon Shore, as well as other places exposed to constant raids from the Irish/Picts/Germans, as well as a possible invasion from continental Romans, some sort of semi-professional, higher quality levies would be formed to man frontier fortifications and coastal/river flotillas, as well as assisting professional soldiers. In spirit (and in blood as well in several areas), they are descendants of Limitanei units.

2) Professional Levy: Formed by well-off and free peasants and city dwellers, as well as small landholders, and retainers and men-at-arms, these are your heavy infantry, light cavalry, and other specialists. These people would have means of equipping themselves or, have wealthy patrons to provide for them, and depending on how powerful the government is, could be provided with some supplementary payments.

3) Landed soldiers: Some form of feudalism is inevitable since Britain doesn't have necessary amounts of cash to pay its soldiers. If the British government are powerful enough, these would resemble Pronoia of the Byzantine Empire, where soldiers are given a right to take a portion of tax for themselves, but not the (inheritable) ownership of the land itself, and must provide fixed numbers of armed retainers during wartime. Of course, if the authority of government weakens, soldiers might take a de facto ownership of the land. These class would be dominated by heavy cavalrymen, as only they could afford the cost of good horses and equipment.

In addition to these, there are going to be Foederati from both the native Britons and the Germans.

I like it! Do you think you might see the Romans, in an attempt to improve the quality of their levies/reduce the time it takes to train professional soldiers, do what the English did? i.e. Mandate practice of some kind - i.e. all Roman (and Cumbric, for sake of argument) men must spend four hours a week training in some form of warfare under penalty of something. If only to ensure they have a wider pool of recruits in case of a raid.
 
I think the establishment of a Romano-Briton/Romano-Cumbric/Romano-Cymric state is largely inevitable. Unlike the Greeks of Alexanders day, they aren't a large population of soldiers with that expectation on them. As a result, I think you're likely to see the 'adoption' or 'promotion' of more friendly clans to effectively the status of nearly-Roman, to outright equals in time, if only so that those groups can expand the manpower available to the Domain.
Probably.

I like it! Do you think you might see the Romans, in an attempt to improve the quality of their levies/reduce the time it takes to train professional soldiers, do what the English did? i.e. Mandate practice of some kind - i.e. all Roman (and Cumbric, for sake of argument) men must spend four hours a week training in some form of warfare under penalty of something. If only to ensure they have a wider pool of recruits in case of a raid.
Yes, for Limitanei, Professional Levy, and Landed soldiers, at least.
 
Top