Jaded_Railman
Banned
At the tender age of 32 (Hm, what's the significance of that, I wonder?) Emperor Julian II (The Philosopher or The Apostate) was struck in the side with a thrown spear while fighting, unarmored, in a rearguard action after his army had abandoned the siege of Ctesiphon. The contemporary account is that he rushed into the scuffle so suddenly he had completely foregone putting on his armor in favor of fighting to inspire his troops. The spear was removed and he was treated but he ultimately died, after only two years as Emperor.
Now, Julian was a highly successful military commander. He did a bang-up job in the West fighting off Germanic incursions in Gaul and managed to push aside several Persian armies in his rush to Ctesiphon. He was a bit arrogant (apparently his invasion of Sassanid Persia was partially prompted by his belief that he was a second Alexander), and his problem with Christians could only lead to trouble later on (there is a myth that he was killed not by a Persian spear thrower, but by a Roman Christian soldier, although this is almost definitely untrue), but during his time Christians didn't represent a majority population and he was actually rather successful in removing them from positions of power and influence (or converting them back to Neo-platonism, his religion of preference). He was involved in a lot of transfer of wealth from the church of the time back to pagan temples and the like.
So, lets say he takes a moment before rushing into battle at Maranga to pull on his armor. The fatal spear blow of OTL instead glances off and he survives. Assume, for posterity's sake, that afterwards he will not meet some untimely end and will live to die of old age.
Now, I'm sure there have been discussions ad infinitum with regards to Julian's positions on Christianity. I'd like to concentrate on something different. Yes, a lot of his internal policy was related to undermining Christian solidarity in the Empire, but there are some interesting side effects of his policies. For instance, he was interested in establishing an early form of the welfare state to combat the dependence the pagan poor had on Christian charity. This is interesting not only for the theological implications, but because, if institutionalized and enacted to the correct extent, might this have been able to fight the growing wealth divide and slide into manorialism which would doom the later Roman economy and herald the rise of feudalism?
Also, Julian's great successes against Germanic confederations infringing upon the Gallic limes are for no reason unrepeatable. Would he allow the Goths to move across the Danube with the new threat of the Huns? Would he continue to accept the Franks in Toxandria as foederati or would they eventually be expelled like they had been in Tarraco a century earlier?
What might the implications of a more economically sound and culturally unified Roman Empire have for the Hunnic wars of the 5th century? Who would succeed a Julian who survived 30 more years?
Now, Julian was a highly successful military commander. He did a bang-up job in the West fighting off Germanic incursions in Gaul and managed to push aside several Persian armies in his rush to Ctesiphon. He was a bit arrogant (apparently his invasion of Sassanid Persia was partially prompted by his belief that he was a second Alexander), and his problem with Christians could only lead to trouble later on (there is a myth that he was killed not by a Persian spear thrower, but by a Roman Christian soldier, although this is almost definitely untrue), but during his time Christians didn't represent a majority population and he was actually rather successful in removing them from positions of power and influence (or converting them back to Neo-platonism, his religion of preference). He was involved in a lot of transfer of wealth from the church of the time back to pagan temples and the like.
So, lets say he takes a moment before rushing into battle at Maranga to pull on his armor. The fatal spear blow of OTL instead glances off and he survives. Assume, for posterity's sake, that afterwards he will not meet some untimely end and will live to die of old age.
Now, I'm sure there have been discussions ad infinitum with regards to Julian's positions on Christianity. I'd like to concentrate on something different. Yes, a lot of his internal policy was related to undermining Christian solidarity in the Empire, but there are some interesting side effects of his policies. For instance, he was interested in establishing an early form of the welfare state to combat the dependence the pagan poor had on Christian charity. This is interesting not only for the theological implications, but because, if institutionalized and enacted to the correct extent, might this have been able to fight the growing wealth divide and slide into manorialism which would doom the later Roman economy and herald the rise of feudalism?
Also, Julian's great successes against Germanic confederations infringing upon the Gallic limes are for no reason unrepeatable. Would he allow the Goths to move across the Danube with the new threat of the Huns? Would he continue to accept the Franks in Toxandria as foederati or would they eventually be expelled like they had been in Tarraco a century earlier?
What might the implications of a more economically sound and culturally unified Roman Empire have for the Hunnic wars of the 5th century? Who would succeed a Julian who survived 30 more years?