A much larger Rome that survives until the present day.

I have always wondered under what conditions could we get the largest Roman empire possible ( not divided) that survives until the present day and is the superpower or one of the superpowers in the world. Now, I would post a timeline, I've thought about one for a while, but I have a VERY general knowledge of Roman history and I don't think that any TL I could do would be very good or detailed, and probably wouldn't be very realistic. Some ideas I have come up with:

1. Julius Caesar admired Alexander the Great, so what if he had not been killed (either he learns of the plot to kill him and brutally punishes those responsible or maybe pardons them (not likely) or just happens to avoid it and then the conspirators chicken out and accept Caesar's power) and went on to try to out do Alexander or at least equal him in sheer conquests. Maybe conquering Britain, Germany up to at least the Elbe, Dacia and then going after Persia all teh way to the Ganges just to prove he is as great as Alexander. Maybe if he realizes he barely escaped assassination, he will decide to limit his own power and allow the Senate more power to quite the senators and assure his rule, perhaps he could institute some good civics while he's at it.

2. The above scenario affects Augustus becaseu he may or may not become emperor. What if a more militaristic, but just leader becomes emperor instead, will Rome expand further and add to Caesar's conquests, given that the above scenario happened and what would these conquests be?

3. If Rome did conquer the areas mentioned above and successfully assimilate the population, could they then invade into what is now Denmark, Sarmatia (western Russia and Ukraine), or Arabia?

4. Would Rome expand further down the coast of west Africa or round the tip of Africa and start colonies in south Africa? What about Meroe or Axum, would Rome invade these empires (can't remember if they invaded either)?

Could Rome discover gun powder and modify their navy for open ocean travel? If so could they discover America and start colonies and could they be supplied and protected? When is the earliest date for this?

5. If Rome could conquer Sarmatia, could it continue to the Urals, since the tribes in that area were more sparse and unorganized than in western Europe ( I think, don't even know their names actually)? If they did reach the Urals, it would be a great natural defense that any Roman emperor would probably like to put forts on so that the Easter border in the north would not have to be worried about as much or as heavily manned. With all this land in Eastern Europe could we have some type of Roman lebensraum where the Roman government gives incentives to families who are willing to go out and start small Roman towns in Sarmatia and further east with the idea of eventually having a large Roman population? Also a river called the Intysh ( I think)that runs below the Urals which could further act as a natural border with forts that could run straight into the Persian conquests made by Caesar if that happened). Could they have stopped the Mongolian invasions or eventually won with these borders and defenses?

6. Finally would Rome ever take on China or India? What woudl a war be like with either? Could Rome win? How far could Rome eventually expand?

Here is a map to show you what I had in mind, don't know the year, but maybe someone could help, and give ideas, modify the map, whatever you want to do. Maybe after I get some ideas I could do a timeline.

map2.png
 
Perhaps if the Romans discovered a type of visual telegraph they would be able to keep the empire intact. Even still, that's pretty hard to do even in modern times.
 
I had posted something on this a while back, here let me bump it so that you may see some ideas (i dont know if anything of use is on there, but you could just read it)
 

Faeelin

Banned
ericams2786 said:
1. Julius Caesar admired Alexander the Great, so what if he had not been killed (either he learns of the plot to kill him and brutally punishes those responsible or maybe pardons them (not likely) or just happens to avoid it and then the conspirators chicken out and accept Caesar's power) and went on to try to out do Alexander or at least equal him in sheer conquests. Maybe conquering Britain, Germany up to at least the Elbe, Dacia and then going after Persia all teh way to the Ganges just to prove he is as great as Alexander.

He could certainly try; I'm not sure why Caesar would have more luck than Varus, Pompey, or Crassus...

. If Rome did conquer the areas mentioned above and successfully assimilate the population, could they then invade into what is now Denmark, Sarmatia (western Russia and Ukraine), or Arabia?

Arabia, sure; they tried in the 20s BC in OTL, and denmark would probably follow from the conquest of Germania.

Could Rome discover gun powder and modify their navy for open ocean travel? If so could they discover America and start colonies and could they be supplied and protected? When is the earliest date for this?

IMO, the Romans could have built ocean going ships; they were familiar with mixing the building techniques of northern and southern europe, and familiar with deep ocean navigation. They just lacked the incentive to do so.

6. Finally would Rome ever take on China or India? What woudl a war be like with either? Could Rome win? How far could Rome eventually expand?

Rome might win, but its victory depends on a lot of things. If the Empire began an industrial revolution, it's a heck of a lot more likely...

(I do think it's possible, as I research more about the strange and weird world of the Roman Empire. What were they doing, building canals?)
 
The problem I have with this scenario is that big empires are high-maintenance affairs and having one last for centuries, let alone millennia, is very, very improbable.

- The Roman style of government was based on ruling organised territorial state units, originally city states. They may have been able to find a way to deal with more fluid tribal systems, but it was hard. Taking over all of Northern Europe and European Russia would have to be the outcome of centuries of prior development there. The same goes for large chunks of West Africa. I could see it in a kind of clientage system, but not as full provincial rule.

- Roman government was not capable of maintaining control in the face of full-scale local opposition. There was not enough personnel to govern. I don't think we can assume that everyone in this empire accepts Roman rulers for hundreds of years, and the Romans were certainly willing to let go of marginal territory if the costs of control outweighed the benefits.

- The best hope a Roman Empire would have for continuity would be to acquire (as it did OTL) the mantle of legitimacy. An empire whose rule is cast as natural or legitimate will find successor governments to continue its traditions even if the old centre of power can not support itself. That is why 'There'll always be a China', and why there was a Roman Empire 1300 years after Odoacer. But the power structure itself would have to go through a few changes.

- Finally, as was pointed out, technology makes holding ogether large empires difficult. Not impossible, but difficult. So you'd need a good reason why the Romans managed it.
 
Kidblast said:
Perhaps if the Romans discovered a type of visual telegraph they would be able to keep the empire intact. Even still, that's pretty hard to do even in modern times.
Like a Heliograph?

I had this idea for a network of heliograph/pony express stations strung across the empire. Confidential messages could be sent on horseback (with the heliograph stations warning the next station to be ready to receive a rider), while stuff that was more time-sensitve would be signaled. They could keep track of all sorts of useful information (weather, disease, unrest, etc.). Also, I could see private individuals occasionally hiring this signal service to send messages for them. I'm sure that the Imperial Government would frown on that, at least initially. Maybe somebody would then realize that they could make a tidy profit from this.
 
Yes, exactly. I was thinking of something like the service in Terry Pratchett's books called the "Clacks" that sent messages by flags or something of that nature. I would suppose that this might be private, but most likely the government would be in charge of construction.

That would be one way to circumvent the geographic difficulties in such a large empire as described.
 
Potatos For the Legions

American crops get into Europe earlier, so population increases enough to make farmers beat out pastoralists, so that the Romans can beat them using infantry armies.
All Europe is under them. The only opposition is horse barbarians from the steppes and savannahs of the 'stans and North Africa.
They never fall.
 
Heh. Judging from that map, India looks like it could be in long-term trouble, squeezed as it is between the Roman and Chinese empires.

RealityBYTES
 
Ok, I'm going to finally start a timeline for this thread. I've thought about this POD for a while and I will go ahead and admit from the start that I am no Roman/ancient history expert. I'm not sure if any of this is plausable, though I doubt it would truly be ASB. I think that had someone had the foresight to see these possible solutions back in Roman times, perhaps Rome would have survived until the present day with a huge empire that influences the world much like the British empire did. By this I mean Roman cultural values and Latin being very influential. Now I don't know much about Roman civics or law but the POD starts with Caesar not being assassinated and introducing some new civics as a result of his near assassination. Later these civics help hold together the Roman empire and cut down on civil wars so that the empire isn't weakened. Also technology will be discovered sooner than in OTL because of greater emphasis on science and because of less social and political problems within the empire itself. I saw on the history channel recently that the Romans not only were excellent architects but actually may have built the first ever mechanical factory (a wheat factory thing) that ran on water power. Plus I figure with their tradition of science and building and powerful culture, making the Roman empire exist until the present day is relatively easy: keep up the rate of expansion as in previous centuries, give Rome competent and lenient/fair emperors while getting rid of the idiots like Nero that ruined Rome, better civics, less power in the hands of both the emperor and the generals, and better military tech ( at least later on). Considering how long Rome financed and managed its empire as long as it did against all the odds with horrible emperors who killed indiscriminately, drained the treasurey, etc., Rome did an excellent job building an empire. I believe given a better situation/ better luck, and more time, Rome would still be here today spreading over most of Europe, Asia and Africa. So here's my ideas, please feel free to comment or criticize, just remember I'm not a Roman history expert so don't impale me too bad on this, oh and I'll try my best on the maps.

44 B.C. Caesar as he is about to leave for the Senate building, is informed by Brutus that there is a conspiracy to kill him. Brutus admits he was part of the plot, but says he had a change of heart and just couldn't kill Caesar. He suggests that Caesar be lenient on the punishment of the other members of the conspiracy so as to show the Roman people that he is an honorable emperor. He also suggests that Caesar immediately go before the Roman people and reveal the plot to get the people behind him and help discourage another assassination plot. Caesar orders his guard to arrest all the conspirators pointed out by Brutus except Brutus who he pardons given that Brutus remains his advisor and swears allegiance to him, Brutus agrees. The next day, Caesar speaks to the people of Rome and explains the assassination attempt and says he understands that the people and the Senate are worried about his powers as emperor. He vows to the Roman people to be a just ruler and he will limit the powers of emperor through law and guarantees that the power of the Senate will not be diminished (basically a very early and primitive form of separation of powers). He further promises to add to the glories of Rome by conquering many new lands for the Roman people. The people rejoice at this news and basically endorse Caesar's rule by showing their extreme support for him. All others who may have thought of ousting Caesar are now completely discredited and most become huge proponents of Caesar. The conspirators are pardoned but stripped of all titles and powers they may have previously held. To compensate them Caesar gives them land to live on and a small amount of monetary compensation.

Three months after the failed assassination attempt, Caesar announces that his son, Caesarion will be his heir and that he will soon be working on a draft of the Great Law of the Senate and People of Rome with the Senators. Taking advantage of his popularity he explains that though Cleopatra is foreign she will not threaten Rome's power, and how Egypt and Rome can grow stronger together through a close mutual relationship. The people believe him wholeheartedly because he is so popular.

The first part of the Great Law is voted on in the Senate and brought into law in November. The rest will be drafted during and after a military campaign that Caesar plans for the spring of 43 B.C. Caesar designates his nephew Augustus as his interim emperor while he is gone (since Caesarion is only 4 yrs old) and encourages him to contribute ideas to the new constitution or Great Law since he is more civics minded than he is. Augustus agrees with this and begins in earnest to complete the second part of the Great Law. Caesar gathers an army and apoints Marc Antony as one of his commanders. He, Antony and Brutus will leave with a 80,000 man army for the northern border Macedonia in preparation for an invasion of Dacia, Pannonia, and eventually Germany. Caesar's main goal is to be greater than Alexander the Great. He decides to commit most of the rest of his life to adding territory to Rome and leaving the administrative part of his rule to Augustus who already agreed publicly to give up power to Caesarion at the age of 18 should anything happen to Caesar before that time. He will from time to time converse with Augustus and help tweak the Great Law.

In December, while gathering an army for his northern campaign, Caesar is distracted and leaves for Egypt because of a revolt in Alexandria. Caesar takes his army of 30,000 and invades Egypt, and defeats the rebels. He is very careful not to damage Alexandria and tries to foster loyalty by allowing Cleopatra to command part of his army along with some of her loyal Egyptian followers. The strategy mostly works and by March, Caesar leaves for Rome and he and Cleopatra immediately integrate the Egyptian and Roman thrones, basically annexing Egypt to Rome. In May, Caesar, Antony, Brutus and the army leave for Macedonia. Almost simultaneously, another general named Gaius Claudius Scipio is given authority by Caesar to finish the invasion of Britain with 25,000 men. (sorry don't know the actual names of generals of this time)

* I will continue this TL as soon as possible. Sorry if all this seems implausable or if there are mistakes.
 
ericams2786 said:
6. Finally would Rome ever take on China or India? What woudl a war be like with either? Could Rome win? How far could Rome eventually expand?

Again- there is no historical power known as India. No one managed to unite the subcontinent under their rule until the British. If anyone did, their enemies would be contending with a power as large as Europe with vast resources behind it.
 
RealityBYTES said:
Heh. Judging from that map, India looks like it could be in long-term trouble, squeezed as it is between the Roman and Chinese empires.

RealityBYTES

BTW Ericams you have to take India into account.

For some reason everyone takes an approximation of the modern Pakistani border as the border of various "Indian Empires" instead of putting it at the Hindu Kush where the logical border between India and any Western power is :D

That's flatland- any hypothetical Indian Empire will sweep over you. The Hindu Kush is a much more logical border (OTL Pakistan-Iran border)

If you're taking on a hypothetical power the size of China or Europe you need some proper defensive terrain.

And once again FFS- a united India AND a Japanese Empire in SE Asia? Please...

How do the relatively primitive kingdoms in Japan get past China?

Please, please check this thread.
 
Last edited:
I appreciate your comments about India and Japan. I don't really know how a united India or Japan would come about, but the map is not in the ancient past, it would be much more recent. I agree that China would be much more powerful, but as I said I never included a date with the map and I haven't really even began the TL yet, so who's to say India or Japan won't be absorbed into China or at least partly, or at least temporarily. There's at least another 300-600 years worth of history left depending on the year you give the map.
 
ericams2786 said:
I appreciate your comments about India and Japan. I don't really know how a united India or Japan would come about, but the map is not in the ancient past, it would be much more recent.

What I meant was that with a United India, it's very, very unlikely that Japan would be in control of the East Indies. Remember for all it's cultural influence nowadays for most of it's history Japan has been a backwater.
 
Well that's definitely true, guess I'll work out some of that in my TL, but remember as I mentioned before I am no expert at ancient history, I'll be teaching mysef as I go along. Thanks for the help. DO you happen to know anything about Chinese and Indian armies, how they were organized and so forth. Do you think they would beat or be beaten by a Roman army? Also how large of an army do you think Rome could have fielded at the height of its power, say under Trajan?
 
I remember it being mentioned that if Rome had conquered all of Parthia (rather than just Mesopotamia), a Romanization process could have been successful. Having Parthia as an enemy sitting next to Mesopotamia was too indefensible, though.
 
Ericams,

Your scenario is pretty good, but I think you need to have Caesar being less monarchical.

The Romans hated/feared the idea of kings. The early emperors had to pretend to not be monarchs, just holders of "extraordinary offices" (essentially multiple positions at once).

Wax the comment about "Roman and Egyptian thrones" and him claiming to be a "just and fair Emperor" ("Imperator" still meant "general"). All Caesar really needs to do is claim that he is not exceeding the powers that being Dictator gave him, and conspicuously include the Senate in various projects.
 
Ok thanks. I knew the Romans were afraid of the word "king" so that's why I had the idea that maybe if Caesar was scared after his near assassination maybe he could then take Brutus' advice and asure the Roman people that he is not trying to take power from the Senate and portray himself as more of a leader than a king. That's another reason I needed Caesar and the Senate to complete a set of laws describing the power of the emperor and how the title gets passed down so as to cut out on crazy emperors and civil wars. I didn't realize Imperator meant general, thanks for that.
 
The first part of the Great Law passed in 44 B.C. :

1. The Senate cannot be dissolved.

2. The emperor can propose laws which are then voted on in the Senate, and a 2/3 majority is nessecary to pass a law. If a law is rejected the emperor can apeal to the Senate and the Roman people once and the measure can be voted on one last time. It requires a 3/4 majority to become law this time. If it fails again, the measure can not be introduced again for another 10 years. The empereor can not vote if a bill is introduced this way.

3. A head Senator will be voted on by the Senate (2/3 majority) and will preside over the Senate for 5 years and can have only 4 terms.

4. Any Senator can introduce a bill, but cannot vote on it, the emperor ( or a representative of the emperor) can vote with the Senate. It requires a 2/3 majority to become law. If both the emperor and the head senator vote "no" the bill is Vetoed. If just the emperor or the head senator vote "no" the measure must be voted on again and it must get a 3/4 majority to become law(all votes are equal the second time). If at anytime both the emperor and the head senator vote "yes" all the votes are equal and work towards the required majority.

5. Each Roman provence gets 2 Senators that are appointed by the provential governor. The term is for 10 years and each can only have 2 terms.

6. Each provence gets its own senate within its capital and the provential senate consists of 30 senators with 10 year terms (max of 2 terms) and the Senators are voted on by the land owning Roman citizens and soldiers of each provence (not full emancipation, basically the wealthy men, but since women can be land owners in Roman society, some women can vote as well). One Senator will be the head senator and will be appointed the same way as the national head senator, same terms and everything.

7. The provencial governor is also elected by the land owning Roman citizens
and sodiers dwelling in that provence and has to be confirmed by a 2/3 majority in the provencial senate. The governor is like a miniature emperor and has the same powers as the emperor as listed above with respect to introducing or vetoing a law. The governor is subordinate to the emperor though.

* the next part of the law will be concerned mainly with the emperor's powers, how the title is passed down and how an emperor is appointed should a family line die out*
 
Top