WI: the Huns won the battle of the Catalaunian Plains

What would have been the consequences if Attila and his Hunnish army had defeated the Roman army under Aetius and its Visigothic and other allies at the battle of the Cataluanian Plains (or Fields) in June 451? An alternative name is the battle of Chalons. Also if Aetius was killed in the battle. The Vigothic king was actually killed.

Would the Huns have conquered all of Gaul and then invaded Italy? With the death of Aetius who would have taken his place as commander-in-chief of the Roman armies? Could the Huns have conquered Italy?

In OTL the Western Roman Emperor Valentinian III murdered Aetius in Rome in September 454, and was himself killed in March 455 by two barbarian guards who had been close to Aetius. With the death of Aetius on the Catalunian Plains, these events did not happen, so if Valentinian is still Emperor he could theoretically have reigned for many more years. He was only 35 years old when he was killed. It is probable that Ricimer would have ruled through Valentinian as a puppet emperor.

Alternatively if Atilla and the Huns had invaded and conqured Italy and killed Valentinian, would that have meant the end of the Western Roman Empire? Marcian, the Eastern Roman Emperor from 450-457 had an isolationist policy towards the West and left it to its fate. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcian .

According to one account Attila's died on the night of his wedding to his wife Ildico in 453. He had drunk heavily and had a severe nosebleed from which he suffocated. If he had won at the Catalaunian Plains, and not met and married Ildico, then his death would not have happened when it did. Another theory is that Ildico stabbed or poisoned Attila.
 

Deleted member 5719

This is one of those that have to be worked out step by step, and which could end up with a completely bizarre TL.

I'd advise you to try writing it to see what happens. I'm writing an alternate 1066 timeline, and with POD's that far back you literally have to take each big decision stemming from your POD and work it out... then you've got to start inventing characters, and later societies, countries and religions.

Hard work but rewarding.
 
Knowing what we do about Atilla, I'm guessing that if he conquered Italy, he would definately have decided to put an end to the western empire.

However then Leo would have sent his massive expedition against Italy rathar than Africa, and as Attilla is almost certianly dead by then, it has a good chance of success. My guess is that Leo would appoint somebody to be western Emperor in this case, but things will be wierd since Gothic power in Italy was probably broken by the Huns.
 
If he did go on towards Italy, he would have spelled the end for the WRE, not doubt. I think the Huns would also have prevailed longer, as more victories would most likely have caused more to join them. If Attila had lived longer, he might very well have become an even more important figure of his age.

The horde would, of course, plummet into succession war and split when he died, no matter when and where.
 
If he lived until a ripe old age (perhaps he makes some kind of deal with the Eastern Emperor and avoids trouble), might he plan for his succession?

That is possible. However, I seriously doubt the stability of the horde could be maintained anyways. Genghis Khan's succession by Kublai was well-planned and organized, but the new khan's authority was in effect limited to Far East Asia. I suspect the same problem would arise for the Huns - leaders in more far-off parts would break loose and try to assume leadership or form their own horde IMO.

On the other hand, if the Huns actually settled down (presumably somewhere in central Europe) and made peace deals with Rome, and formed an actual state, succession crisis might not be that big a problem.
 
A victory by the Huns under Attila at the Catalaunian Plains, and the death of Aetius in that battle, would not necessarily have led to Attila conquering all of Italy. It would depend on what sort of army the Western Roman Empire (WRE) and its allies could assemble. Also Ravenna was nearly impregnable, so if the Huns beseiged it the Western Emperor could hold on there until the Huns withdraw.

Although Marcian generally ignored the WRE there is speculation that he was implicated in the death of Attila. So if it was not Ildico acting as Marcian's agent who murdered her husband, then another beautiful, sexy young woman would have been the bait to attract Attila to his death.

Whenever or however Attila died his empire would have fallen apart after his death.

So in the late 450s with Attila dead and his empire fragmented, the WRE has survived in Italy and possibly in Dalmatia. Valentinian III is still Western Emperor and Ricimer keeps him on the throne thus avoiding the succession of short-lived imperial reigns from 455 to 476. The WRE has a degree of stability and is able to survive until an Eastern Emperor is able to provide military and financial assistance to reconquer lands lost to the barbarians.
 
A victory by the Huns under Attila at the Catalaunian Plains, and the death of Aetius in that battle, would not necessarily have led to Attila conquering all of Italy. It would depend on what sort of army the Western Roman Empire (WRE) and its allies could assemble. Also Ravenna was nearly impregnable, so if the Huns beseiged it the Western Emperor could hold on there until the Huns withdraw.

If Attila wins at Chalons, then it would depend on what Attlia's aims are as to what happens next. If Attila plans on setting himself up as some kind of ruler in the Western Empire, or if he plans on future raids on Gaul, then I think his next step would be at attack the Visigoths in Aquitaine, and break their power.

With Aetius dead and the Roman army presumably in disarray, Rome wouldn't lift a finger while Theodoric faces Attila alone. With the Visigoths defeated the Huns would be able to proceed into Spain or Italy. Spain's barbarian tenets would no doubt be willing to pledge alliegence to Attila rather than face his wrath, so Attila proceeds to Italy.

On the other hand, Attila could strike a deal with Theodoric, and Theodoric could become a member of Attila barbarian federation. With that Theodoric would be walking away from Rome, severing the thin legalisms that disguised his independence.

Ravenna won't fall, and Rome can't really field an army, so Attila pillages and then eventually leaves. He probably still dies, though now with the power vaccum in Gaul the fall-out is worse. Rome is barely in control of Italy and Dalmatia, and the barbarian tribes of Spain are probably eyeing both north and south.

Although Marcian generally ignored the WRE there is speculation that he was implicated in the death of Attila. So if it was not Ildico acting as Marcian's agent who murdered her husband, then another beautiful, sexy young woman would have been the bait to attract Attila to his death.

Whenever or however Attila died his empire would have fallen apart after his death.

So in the late 450s with Attila dead and his empire fragmented, the WRE has survived in Italy and possibly in Dalmatia. Valentinian III is still Western Emperor and Ricimer keeps him on the throne thus avoiding the succession of short-lived imperial reigns from 455 to 476. The WRE has a degree of stability and is able to survive until an Eastern Emperor is able to provide military and financial assistance to reconquer lands lost to the barbarians.

Ricimer might not be able to consolidate control in Rome, since Valentinian III proved himself willing to dispatch powerful generals who he felt were a threat. Ricimer could take up where Aetius left off and try to referee the free-for-all in Gaul, where the Franks are probably advancing (well in front of their OTL progress).

I think that this could end up being good for the West Romans. With the early defeats they would be able to consolidate and perhaps get more support from the East. Then, potentially you could see a deal with the Franks, giving them control of Gaul in return for an alliance against the Goths.
 
Top