Eastern empire falls, Western Empire lasts till 15th Century

Status
Not open for further replies.
Continue, or heck I'll reinstate this timeline in its own thread... I just mihgt...

Just a postulation, if this can slow down European and middle eastern devolp, maybe even delaying the launch into the west you can point the differences in Mesoamerica after 1520... hmm even as far as a civil war within the Aztec Empire or a Chicimec Invasion.. parelleling it... Tarascan Empire growing or being conquered...
 
Hmmm... I think we did another redo of this one, one not quite so optimistic for Rome. But I'd definately like to see more into this. Too much on my plate right now, unless you guys want me to quit the Future History and dabbling at going back to Saeculorum Romanorum.
 
DominusNovus said:
Hmmm... I think we did another redo of this one, one not quite so optimistic for Rome. But I'd definately like to see more into this. Too much on my plate right now, unless you guys want me to quit the Future History and dabbling at going back to Saeculorum Romanorum.
Hmm.. I was kinda hoping for something more Hunnic with a Mesoamerican and Incan involvement if you can stretch it. I've had an idea for their contination (and disoultion without European) after 1520 that deals with a Hunnic POD..Mind if I use this as a guide for Europe?
 
DominusNovus said:
Hmmm... I think we did another redo of this one, one not quite so optimistic for Rome. But I'd definately like to see more into this. Too much on my plate right now, unless you guys want me to quit the Future History and dabbling at going back to Saeculorum Romanorum.

I'd stick with Saeculuroum Romanorum. Perhaps Othniel can take over this one.
 
Train of Intertia

I think this Alternate TL is one of those that are of a low percent of probability IF you start with Rome already as a formed empire.
Among my reasons for this viewpoint.

The Eastern Empire was sheltered by Geography to some extent.
A tribal migration would find the Plains of Northern Europe an easier place
to move across. The main obstacles are Rivers which a little raft making can easily ameliorate. Contrast that with The formidable mountaineous Balkans with a climate with a real winter, and some really nasty mountain
tribes. IF you were a GOTH tribal leader would really choose to go SOUTH?.

Even if the Eastern Roman Empire were reduced in Half, her population would still be quite larger than the Gothic Tribes. As Someone mentioned
here the Developed world was in the East, the West was by comparison
primitive and underpopulated.
 

Leo Caesius

Banned
One of the major things going against the survival of the Western empire was the fact that the local landowners in the Senate and the vast apparatus of the Catholic Church had more or less turned their back on the empire and disassociated themselves from it. In doing so, they sapped the strength of the army and of the administration, largely because they came to a point where they realized that they could survive without it.

Another problem that distinguishes the Western Empire from, say, China or the Byzantines is that it was unwilling and unable to assimilate the barbarians. Peter Brown writes:
The society of the western provinces of the Roman empire was fragmented. In the late fourth century, boundaries had hardened, and a heightened sense of identity had led to harsher intolerance of the outsider. Senators who had participated in an impressive revival of high standards of Latin literature were little inclined to tolerate a 'barbarian.' ... As a result, the barbarian tribes entered a society that was not strong enough to hold them at bay, but not flexible enough to 'lead their conquerers captive' by absorbing them into Roman life.

...

The barbarian settlers in the West found themselves both powerful and unabsorbable. They were encapsulated by a wall of dumb hatred. They could not have been 'detribalized' even if they had wanted to be, because as 'barbarians' and heretics they were marked men. The intolerance that greeted the barbarian immigration, therefore, led directly to the formation of the barbarian kingdoms. To be tacitly disliked by 98 per cent of one's fellow men is no mean stimulus to preserving one's identity as a ruling class. The Vandals in Africa from 428 to 533, the Ostrogoths in Italy from 496 to 554, the Visigoths in Toulouse from 418 and later in Spain, up to their conversion to Catholicism in 489, ruled effectively as heretical kingdoms precisely because they were well hated. They had to remain a tight-knit warrior caste, held at arm's length by their subjects. Not surprisingly, the word for 'executioner' is the only direct legacy of two and a half centuries of Visigothic rule to the language of Spain.​
 
Admiral_Ritt said:
I think this Alternate TL is one of those that are of a low percent of probability IF you start with Rome already as a formed empire.
Among my reasons for this viewpoint.

The Eastern Empire was sheltered by Geography to some extent.
A tribal migration would find the Plains of Northern Europe an easier place
to move across. The main obstacles are Rivers which a little raft making can easily ameliorate. Contrast that with The formidable mountaineous Balkans with a climate with a real winter, and some really nasty mountain
tribes. IF you were a GOTH tribal leader would really choose to go SOUTH?.

Even if the Eastern Roman Empire were reduced in Half, her population would still be quite larger than the Gothic Tribes. As Someone mentioned
here the Developed world was in the East, the West was by comparison
primitive and underpopulated.
But they did go south. All the tribes usually intended to attack the eastern empire, where all the wealth was, but fate usually conspired against them.
 
MerryPrankster said:
I'd stick with Saeculuroum Romanorum. Perhaps Othniel can take over this one.
Hey, I'm just intrested in the Huns going against the east, staying allies of the West while having this drag out when the new world gets discovered so I can write about the immediate divergences there within the post classical period because of the lack of the Spainard landings.

Prehaps I'll do something more contemporary as a POD, concerning the New World as the main part of my timeline. Something that crushes the brutal Aztec Empire in its boots. hmmm...?
 
But they did go south. All the tribes usually intended to attack the eastern empire, where all the wealth was, but fate usually conspired against them.
But they weren’t really successful until the Slavic migrations and the onset of the Bulgar and Avar invasions. I’m pretty sure the barbarian tribes here are explicitly the ones of the 5th century, i.e. the Vandals, Alans, Burgundians, Franks, Goths, Huns, Gepids and so on.
 
But they weren’t really successful until the Slavic migrations and the onset of the Bulgar and Avar invasions. I’m pretty sure the barbarian tribes here are explicitly the ones of the 5th century, i.e. the Vandals, Alans, Burgundians, Franks, Goths, Huns, Gepids and so on.

Was that really worth continuing a conversation from 2005?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top