WI: Roman Empire Divided Between Caracalla and Geta?

[hasdrubal barca]

What if Roman Empire Divided Between Caracalla and Geta?

Perhaps Severus puts the idea into place before he dies or Caracalla-Geta just overrule their mother and agree to divide the empire. Caracalla gets the west and Geta the East. First off would Caracalla keep the deal or go back on it later? Who would win a civil war between the two brothers? On the flip side implying the deal is kept what are the results? Long term stability? Would the Severan dynasty survive?

Caracalla and Geta considered dividing the empire in half along the Bosphorus to make their co-rule less hostile. Caracalla was to rule in the west and Geta was to rule in the east. They were persuaded not to do this by their mother.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caracalla

"Herodian tells graphically how Domna used every means she had, including tears, in an attempt to prevent one solution, the geographical division of the Empire, west and east, between the brothers, with Caracalla receiving the west (including the North African provinces up to Greek speaking Cyrenaica) and Geta the east, with Alexandria or Antioch as his capital, the Senators were to divide according to their origins."
Julia Domna by Barbara Levick

 

[Stolengood]

Not happening; they couldn't Geta long.

 

[SlyDessertFox]

Well that's asking for a civil war the moment they split. Though it's kind of hard to know who would win, since we know next to nothing about Geta's command abilities and Caracalla was kind of a mixed bag militarily.

 

[EmperorOfTheNorthSea]

Dividing the empire isn't such a big no-no that people seem to think it is.

True nearly anyone who suggests it is planning on taking over the other half sooner or later but it allows Emperor's to be at the frontier more and thus means less chance of some successful general going and trying to make himself Emperor. True this is harder in the East were there are the fronts on the Danube and the fronts in the East, however if like in the late empire where political shenanigans are going on all the time then that won't make a difference.

 

[Magnum]

Dividing the empire isn't such a big no-no that people seem to think it is.

True nearly anyone who suggests it is planning on taking over the other half sooner or later but it allows Emperor's to be at the frontier more and thus means less chance of some successful general going and trying to make himself Emperor. True this is harder in the East were there are the fronts on the Danube and the fronts in the East, however if like in the late empire where political shenanigans are going on all the time then that won't make a difference.

Danube frontier would be included in the 'western' half under this scenario.

Since Caracalla had his brother murdered OTL (among many other acts of violence, such as massacring Geta's supporters or the citizens of Alexandria), it's quite likely there would be a civil war ITTL

 

[Agricola]

Danube frontier would be included in the 'western' half under this scenario.

This makes the West even poorer than it was OTL. The Illyricum and Greece, with its low population and low economic power adds not that much to the treasury of the empire. But with the Danube border and its army it adds a lot to the costs.

So this kind of division is doomed to fail from its very beginning.

Caracalla has to start a civil war, in order to survive. If not, the West would be overrun by barbarians sooner or later and/or splitted further. And the rich East would relax or raid Mesopotamia occasionally.

 

[Magnum]

This makes the West even poorer than it was OTL. The Illyricum and Greece, with its low population and low economic power adds not that much to the treasury of the empire. But with the Danube border and its army it adds a lot to the costs.

So this kind of division is doomed to fail from its very beginning.

In theory, no, as there is nothing stopping the Eastern emperor from sending money to the West.

In practice however, the problem lies with Caracalla himself, and his desire to kill real or perceived threats, even if those are his little brother or Alexandrian middle-class who witnessed theater plays mocking him.

 

[hasdrubal barca]

In theory, no, as there is nothing stopping the Eastern emperor from sending money to the West.

In practice however, the problem lies with Caracalla himself, and his desire to kill real or perceived threats, even if those are his little brother or Alexandrian middle-class who witnessed theater plays mocking him.

I came across this today, "he merely showed her his sword and said 'cheer up mother as long as we have this we shall not want for money'."
Julia Domna by Barbara Levick
I think it answered are question.