WI: The Byzantines have more huge walls.

Throughout the fifth century, the Byzantines build Theodosian Walls (of the same quality of Constantinople's) around most of their major cities. Jerusalem, Alexandria, Antioch, Thessalonica, Corinth, Dyrrachium, Serdica, Trebizond, Aleppo, and Damascus have full Theodosian walls by the dawn of the sixth century.

Justinian won't be able to go on his reconquista due to the treasury being depleted and the imperial army is definitely going to suffer in the short term.

No reconquista means (probably) no Heraklios, but will the Byzantines be able to survive the Persian crisis (assuming it even happens) by having their major cities better fortified?

Of course, civil wars will be a lot harder to put down. What are the short and long term effects on the Empire?
 
Nobody ever won a war with passive defences. Keeping, say, Antioch or Alexandria is useless if the hinterland of those cities falls. The walls might keep the cities safe but without the ability to project power you end up with the same situation the Byzantines faced just before the fall of Constantinople- the loss of all the actual territory except for a few fortified strongholds.
 
Nobody ever won a war with passive defences. Keeping, say, Antioch or Alexandria is useless if the hinterland of those cities falls. The walls might keep the cities safe but without the ability to project power you end up with the same situation the Byzantines faced just before the fall of Constantinople- the loss of all the actual territory except for a few fortified strongholds.
Your right about the fact that walls themselves don’t win wars however I think they're a lot more strategically valuable then your giving them credit for. If the walls are well built and maintained in addition to the city being adequately stocked in order to withstand a prolonged siege. The benefits are even greater for locations that can be resupplied at least partially by sea. In the end what they are very good at is making opponents choose between several rather distasteful options.
*They can try and force a breech and then storm the city which tends to much more costly for the attacker then the defenders.
*A siege which typically requires more men on the outside then inside so again not a great deal for the attacker.
*Burn everything in the countryside it worked for Richard the Lion heart the problem is armies tend to get at least a portion of their supplies from the field so without a strong supply line this can more harmful than beneficial if the defenders are well laid in and are willing to bite the bullet.
*Bypass the position entirely and leave it for later. Not a very wise option since this leaves your rear and supply line open to harassment.

Again I agree with your assessment that walls don’t win wars but provided you do fully exploit their usefulness with sufficient soldiers and supplies they can make the chance of victory much greater.
 
Last edited:
Fortifications like walled towns/cities and major castles are best described as bases for dominating the surrounding countryside rather than passive defenses. A large fortification dominates the countryside for 20 miles around it, denying that area's use to the enemy and tying up forces to invest it. Multiply this a dozen times and you can see the magnitude of the problem.
 
Nobody ever won a war with passive defences. Keeping, say, Antioch or Alexandria is useless if the hinterland of those cities falls. The walls might keep the cities safe but without the ability to project power you end up with the same situation the Byzantines faced just before the fall of Constantinople- the loss of all the actual territory except for a few fortified strongholds.

This is before the loss of Egypt, so Byzantium is still a very urbanized culture. A lot of wealth is still generated in the cities, so keeping them safe is a very good thing.
 
The walls are good for costal cities because, even though an army can destroy the cities hinterland, said city can withstand a siege for long period of time because of the Byzantine Navy. In the end this might buy the Byzantines the 50 to 100 years or so they need to maybe get their act together and maybe keep the empire together.
 
Top