I think it might be the sort of weird union of the two. There is the arrogance of both perfidious Albion, and France. Its impressive. Its also somewhat comic that it is also somewhat inspired by the Romans own Hero-Emperor in Andreas Niketas.
An Age of Miracles Continues: The Empire of Rhomania
- Thread starter Basileus444
- Start date
I think it might be the sort of weird union of the two. There is the arrogance of both perfidious Albion, and France. Its impressive. Its also somewhat comic that it is also somewhat inspired by the Romans own Hero-Emperor in Andreas Niketas.
Evilprodigy
Donor
It's also quite dysfunctional from what we've seen of their internal situation and the infighting between the rules of the multiple crowns. I quite like that element of the story, it makes the fight with parliament a bit more nuanced when the king still has all of France to rule at the will of the much less autonomous French Estates.
I won't lie, there is a part of me that really hopes that the Triunes break at some point. If they take swathes of NW Germany over, they're going to need to figure out how to balance Dutch, Walloon, Flemish, German, French and English concerns, with mixed constitutional arrangements. It's going to make the political centre of gravity unstable methinks.
Evilprodigy
Donor
And that sort of insane juggling is what makes the Triunes so fun from my perspective. It should reach a critical mass at some point where they have to put more effort towards internal stability than expansion.
I get the feeling that the instant Henri is replaced by someone who isn't nearly as competent the whole structure will fall apart with a quickness. (See: OTL Henry VI's ineptness jump-starting the Wars of the Roses, only a far larger scale). What is left standing after the dust settles is what's interesting. I'm actually more interested in what Triune Bengal/Terranova look like in that case than Europe.
The American Colonies are one thing, I feel like that place would be able to stay together with a distinct culture amongst themselves, but there's also the cultural difference that has taken shape between Northern and Southern England that would be super interesting to see play out. But I feel as though this happening would basically lead to unquestioned Rhoman dominance with the loss of their biggest enemy, especially since HRE's been weakened so much and the Ottomans are in for a huge loss.
i like the Triunes because "Triune" is fun to say.Am I the only one who actually likes the Triunes? They got style.
Narratively they're portrayed as opportunistic bastards, but remember that virtually every major power involved here is Imperialistic and self-interested, the Triunes just have less hangups about it.
The Northern v. Southern England thing is a good point. Interesting to see how those shake out.
I don't think the Triunes are the Rhoman's biggest enemy at this point. The Rhomans are looking east towards Island Asia and China/Korea/Japan, while the Triunes are focused on Western Europe and the New World. The only place in Asia where the two have conflicting interests is India and even there each side is more or less doing their own thing with their own circle of allies and enemies. I think the Spanish are Rhomania's largest and most pressing Latin enemy at the moment.
I also think it’s important to remember that we were told that we have reached the high water mark of Rhomania’s interest in central and Northern Europe for the time being. So if the Triunes explode Rhomania is likely to do very little besides watch and maybe financially support Arles if they decide to take advantage of the chaos to grab some land.
The Triunes are a distant threat that doesn’t really matter to them Romans. The Spanish share the Mediterranean with them. Even if it’s to a small extent that is a much more real threat.
Last edited:
Great points. If the Rhomans were super concerned with the Triunes they wouldn't have wrecked the HRE when the latter was trying to stop the Triunes. It is a long way from King's Harbor to Constantinople.
Assuming that isn’t during another major war for them it would make complete sense for them to do so. If not I expect someone else to grab Bengal. Wether that be another foreign country like Ethiopia and Spain or Native Indians reclaiming it.
Its better for native indians to take it. Ethiopia should stick in securing their own lands in India and expanding it. As for spain they can try to take it but they'll have to take it with an immense outpouring of blood and coin
Evilprodigy
Donor
Better is objective. What is good for the Indians is horrible for the Spanish.
Not yet. Opium didn't expand in production until it was introduced to the region by the British from Afghanistan.
Bengal's current dominant industry is Muslin, a type of delicate cotton fabric, but also silk, shipbuilding, saltpeter, steel, and agriculture. It accounted for 12% of the world's GDP in this period until it was annihilated by repeated invasions, first Maratha then British, and the following de-industrialization in the 18th century. It's a sufficient cash cow without Chinese trade, which only appeared in Bengal because of the destruction of their manufacturing industries and orientation of the economy towards agriculture a century after where the TL is right now.
I mean, they are and use their diplomatic channels to express that point. However they were also in the wake of a war that tore through to Macedonia, from Bavaria. That isn't a small amount of suffering the Romans took. The Roman people more or less demanded a punitive campaign before the war was over, because outside of the Triunes, the Holy Roman Empire was the next, if not the bigger, geopolitical threat, and rival. We can't reflect on the sentiment as if that wasn't the case. Roman territory from Greece to Italy had been set on fire.
Whilst yes, there have been geopolitical repercussions to this punitive campaign, there have also been rewards. There will be a fight to control Germany, which is a complete flip from the start of the war - that fight only really happening because the punitive campaign kicked the legs out of the metaphorical unstable chair. The Romans have gone from sitting still in Europe to dictating terms in the East, and with Hungary on their side in that punitive campaign, they've roundly ensured a wall of buffer states that have geographic protections. (I admit I'd rather the Romans held them, but what can you do.)
The Triunes are a threat in a number of ways - one they bankrolled the Madmans War (AKA Theodor's War) and that ability to bankroll others to fight the Romans is a threat. They are in conflict in India, sure, and are set to become more economically powerful as a result of the New World.
They also were behind raids in Roman ports for no discernible reason. They attacked the Romans with no declaration of war, with no provocation, all for the sake of loot. There is a score to settle there.
Further, and I think this is a slight irony given that Arles really was one of the earliest points of conflict for the Romans and Triunes diplomatically. Arles doesn't want to be Triune, the Romans have been their ally for ages. If not for that, who knows, the Romans could well agree to terms with the Triunes, if not for the history of looting of Roman ports by the Triunes.
Evilprodigy
Donor
You don't need to provide logical and reasonable justification for their behaviour. Roman reaction to the war was an emotional backlash and does not need to be explained in a manner that makes their behaviour sound like a reasonable course of action, because it wasn't. The course of the war after the invasion was pushed out of the Balkans was driven primarily buy a cultural, social, and emotional reasons not by geopolitical or rational ones. Perhaps the Romans think what they did was rational, but we are outside observers and do not need to justify their behaviour.
I'm not saying what you have said is wrong, in fact quite far from that as you make good points, but I think it needs to be said that the course of the conflict after the Balkan campaign has been just as, if not more, defined by an emotional reaction rather than geopolitical proaction.
I'm actually increasingly thinking that long term there is significant incentive... for a Triune alliance, particularly if Spain remains less than friendly. If Germany is going to be hostile to the Greeks in the long term and will also be hostile to the Triunes... what exactly do King's Harbor and Constantinople have that's worth a fight?