WI Theodosius I loses battle of Frigidus on 394 AD?

In 5 September 394 Emperor Theodosius clashed with the army of the usurper Eugenius in Frigidum east of Aquileia. Theodosius attacked almost immediately, having undertaken little to no prior reconnaissance of the field of battle. He committed his Gothic allies to action first, hoping to thin their ranks through attrition and lessen their potential threat to the Empire. The Eastern army's headlong attack resulted in heavy casualties but little gain, and general Bacurius was among the dead.
Day's end saw Eugenius celebrating his troops' successful defense of their position while Arbogast sent out detachments to close off the mountain passes behind Theodosius's forces.
After a sleepless night, Theodosius was cheered by the news that the men Arbogast had sent to bottle him up in the valley intended to desert to his side. Theodosius's men attacked once again. This time nature was on their side as a fierce tempest blew along the valley from the east. The high winds blew clouds of dust into the faces of the Western troops. Buffeted by the winds, Arbogast's lines broke and Theodosius gained a decisive victory.
WI Arbogastes detachments didnt defect to Theodosius and he was surrounded and annihilated? How is a potential Theodosius's defeat alters History? Any thoughts?
 
In 5 September 394 Emperor Theodosius clashed with the army of the usurper Eugenius in Frigidum east of Aquileia. Theodosius attacked almost immediately, having undertaken little to no prior reconnaissance of the field of battle. He committed his Gothic allies to action first, hoping to thin their ranks through attrition and lessen their potential threat to the Empire. The Eastern army's headlong attack resulted in heavy casualties but little gain, and general Bacurius was among the dead.
Day's end saw Eugenius celebrating his troops' successful defense of their position while Arbogast sent out detachments to close off the mountain passes behind Theodosius's forces.
After a sleepless night, Theodosius was cheered by the news that the men Arbogast had sent to bottle him up in the valley intended to desert to his side. Theodosius's men attacked once again. This time nature was on their side as a fierce tempest blew along the valley from the east. The high winds blew clouds of dust into the faces of the Western troops. Buffeted by the winds, Arbogast's lines broke and Theodosius gained a decisive victory.
WI Arbogastes detachments didnt defect to Theodosius and he was surrounded and annihilated? How is a potential Theodosius's defeat alters History? Any thoughts?

DG

I played around with a potential TL on that basis a few years back. Somewhat biased but it basically saw extended conflict in the eastern empire leaving that basically devastated and the west survive to finally restore imperial unity. Arbogast, who was the power behind the throne, secured his position in the west by deposing the powerful Bishop of Milan - can't remember his name, who was a bitter rival.

A lot would depend on how crushing the defeat was and how much the western losses were. OTL their defeat was very heavy and coupled with probable mistrust of the remaining western forces and resentment amongst the population against Christian persecution may have been very influential in the fall of the west. As such a victory, if hard won, may have meant that Arbogast has to secure his power base before he can head east. If so you might see a succession struggle for the eastern throne, which could cause bitter dissent. Alternatively, if he does decide he's strong enough to push east possibly all the squabbling factions, Arian Germans, Orthodox, remaining Catholics, Monophesists etc may have decided they needed some unity to face off the threat. Also, if the eastern empire suffers a serious defeat that weakens it but for any reason the western victor isn't able to quickly secure the throne the east will very likely have the Persians on their backs. A lot of possible complications.

Steve
 
Top