Hadrian's Consolidation

[Hecatee]

Somewhere in the german forest, north of Carnuntum, at the border between the Quadi and Marcomanni tribes, december 126 CE

In the dark of the forest, a space had been cleared and surrounded by the signs guaranteeing peace for those who would gather in it. Had a roman been present, he’d have been surprised and deeply troubled by the silent assembly that looked at the priest sacrificing a ox in the middle of the ring.

The clothes of the men gave them away as representants of many tribes and peoples from Dacia to the Atlantic coast. All have in their heart the hatred of the Romans, and on their sword the blood of many an executed legionary. By far the more numerous, the Marcomanni preside over the meeting, but the Iazyges and the Dacians are the more vocal and determined.

It will take some days, some drinking and some deaths, but in the end an agreement is reached by the southern german tribes : the Marcomanni will cross the Danube while the Quades and the Iazyges will attack the Romans to liberate the later’s lands.

In a final ceremony an oath is taken by all present and the Marcomanni have the oath written in stone using their own version of the rune, an inscription which later roman historians mention as the first time the barbarians used writing to commemorate an alliance.

The reasons for this coalition were many : their was, of course, the mood for revenge by the easternmost tribes, but also other conflicts between Rome and the Quades, whose king feared a roman expedition to remove and replace him at the head of the tribe.

The Marcomanni, too, were unhappy because the fleeing Iazyges and Dacians had displaced the easternmost Quades, which had made this tribe encroach the Marcomanni territory : rather than fight one’s germanic brother it felt more right to attack the true cause of the troubles, namely the Empire’s legion.

Feeling that they might not get many opportunities to fight against the Romans with such good prospects of seeing them unable to send reinforcements, western tribes such as the Chatti and, more surprisingly, the Hermunduri, decided that they too would fight, attacking the Agri Decumates area from which they felt they were wrongly expelled.

During the rest of winter men would spend time sharpening their swords, forging spear heads and making sure their wives would carry new babies in the case their warriors did not come back.

But the Romans were not unaware of what was happening in the tribes. Hermunduri traders afraid of losing their trading rights with the Empire and petty chiefs hoping to receive a crown from Rome sent word of the upcoming conflict.

The war would be savage.

 

[Silver]

Man, I hope the Roman Empire successfully, decisively, and utterly crushes and defeats this coalition of German tribes and soon. And that afterwards, the Romans begin the process of depopulating these hostile Germanian tribes so a to allow the Roman Empire to expand and consolidate its gains in Germania, especially in Germania Magna.

 

[altwere]

Why? The Romans were an unqualified disaster for all of the peoples around them. If Conquered you lost your language and culture if you and your family weren't sold as slaves or killed. That's not to say that any of the people the conquered would have acted any better.

 

[Hecatee]

@Silver,

I must say I'm still not completely decided about how far to go with this war, but I'm not thinking about a complete invasion of Germania. It's simply not the mood of the period, which is one of consolidation.

The present war is similar to the Marcommanic wars of Marcus Aurelius, but done a good 40 years earlier with tribes who don't have yet the cohesion that they acquired around the 160's/180's, so the fighting will probably be easier but my goal is not to build an über Rome.

On the other hand I could probably have a military presence established on the northern tributaries of the Danube, which could become early settlements and bases for (much) later full scale romanization of the territory.

The main effet of this campaign will in fact be the disruption of the process of self-identification of the German tribes (by at least half a century if not a full century), which in turns means smaller groups moving against Rome later on, the only full scale threat which stays more or less the same being the Steppe threat.

The Gothic threat might also appear earlier than OTL because they will face less resistance from the weakened western tribes and might thus go west instead of East, putting them earlier in conflict with Rome, but a Rome that would be stronger than OTL...

This earlier pressure on the Empire from the Goths might also lead to a greater roman stability during the third century (military units in the west are less prone to rebellions due to bigger threat to fight).

But all this is yet to be determined in my timeline, this is just a preliminary course of thinking

@Altwere :

That's not the most commonly held view of the topic, in fact before post-colonial studies it was only a view shared by the Jews There is no doubt the Roman rule was traumatic to those of the first generation, but later on it did bring benefits to the conquered populations. Some culture even adapted to make a opportunity from the situation, in particular the Greek world who was able to carve a role for its culture in the Roman order of the world, helped by a true desire by the Romans to include the Greek culture in their own. Many other cultures actually decided to let the old ways disapear because they saw benefits to the Roman way, even before the conquest : look for example at the trends in Gaul before the arrival of Caesar, or even in southern Britain before the invasion by Claudius.

The main exception were the Jews because they always felt threatened and were much more conservative (some would already say fossilized), and thus opposed the external influence of Rome and thus incured the wrath of its legions. But Rome never tried to suppress its litterature or its culture, only to curb the fanaticism of those who could not adapt to the new times and brought disaster to the whole area. But Rome was not, in this regard, different from the Seleucid rulers who had fought against the Maccabees.

At a recent conference at Bar Ilan university, which I attended last june, a Rabbi and scholar explained this situation by the existance of a written tradition in the Jewish world that the Jews felt threatened. I'm not sure it's a complete explaination, because the Jews had incorporated the tenets of Greek and Roman culture for part of their own (see Flavius Josephus comments) and other cultures with strongly developped written traditions (Egypt, Greece, ...) did not have such a reaction.

 

[Hecatee]

Villa Hadriana, Tibur, Near Rome, march 127 CE

Through the snowy alpine pass or through the coastal roads, despite the dangers of the road, the couriers of the empire had done their duty. Now it was time for their Emperor to do his. Yet Hadrian was worn out, a sick old man used by decades of politics and, more recently, family disputes.

While he still clothed himself in purple, he was but a shadow of his former self, his handkerchief bloodier every time he lowered it, and some wondered privately if his brain did not leave him piece by piece with every such movement…

Yet while he did indeed sometimes show signs of weakness, this was not one of those days. The imperial council was gathered in a small, warm room deep in the Villa Hadriana.

The heads of the main administrations, the best generals present in Rome and the imperial heir were all present, sitting on both side of a large table dominated by their leader. Behind those men, alongside the walls of the room, some aids and slaves stood ready to do their masters’ bidding.

“So, you do confirm the reports of barbarian attacks on the Agri Decumani and in the formerly Iazyges lands ?” asked Hadrian, his voice trailing into a feeble cough while he looked at his Ab Epistuli.

The man quietly acquiesced : “Yes princeps, at least two armies of some 30 000 barbarians are reported to attack on both of those borders, a simultaneity that seems to point toward an alliance between the tribes. Even our former allies of the Hermunduri seems to have raised swords against us, alongside with the Chatti, while the Quadi seems to raid our land with the survivors of the Iazyges.”

Voltinius intervened : “I do not like the fact that two tribes standing on the opposite sides of the Marcomanni territory dare to declare war upon Rome while we hear nothing of this tribe… I do suspect that any move to reinforce our borders with forces opposing the Marcomanni would lead to their crossing of the Danuvius. I’m also rather uncomfortable with the idea of moving troops from the Rhine as the barbarians living on the other side of the river may also take advantage, whether or not any previous agreement was found between their chieftains. Yet we have to move forces to fight against the threats of the two armies already in the field.”

Most of the officials gave signs of acquiescence to the heir’s words, but it was the Ab Epistuli that actually voiced the general opinion : “The honorable Caius Aelius Caesar Voltinius is correct with his appraisal of the situation, we are probably facing a threat such as Rome had not faced since the time of Marius and Sulla, when the germanic tribes destroyed the armies of the Republic at the shameful battle of Arausio. We must move rhenan legions and auxiliary units toward the south-east, and have some british forces take their place and lead offensive actions in the German territory to keep the barbarians on the wrong foot. The recent victories of our Caesar have left the britonculi weak, so that we don’t have to fear any kind of rebellion for at least three or four years. We can also move troops from Spain, the VII Gemina, along with the Ala Secunda Flavia Hispanorum, the two mounted cohortes Prima Celtiberorum and Secunda Gallica Civium Romanorum and the two Nova Tironium infantry cohorts to reinforce Germania Superior. Once the situation there has been contained they can move eastward and crush an eventual Marcomanni attack. As for the Quadi and Iazyges, the garrisons of Dacia can support the forces already in Pannonia Inferior, which are already some of our strongest garrisons.”

Many agreed to the plan. Pannonia Inferior was the name given to all of the lands captured between the Danube and Dacia, the former province of the same name having been incorporated into Pannonia Superior following the victory of some eight years before.

As it was rather exposed to raids from the north, it had been decided to provide the region with a strong defensive force despite the fact they had much less border to defend. Hadrian thought of the area as a second Agri Decumanes, a vulnerable but strategical place where defense in depth was to be attempted so that the lands behind the Danuvius may stay safe from the barbarians.

The Emperor rose a hand and all stopped speaking : “Very well, send the spanish legion, the ala and the mounted cohors to Germania, but leave the infantry behind. The gold mine must not be left unattended. Raise one new ala in the region, and temporarily move two cohors from Mauritania to Hispania for the duration of the conflict. My son will lead the hispanic relief force, as a guarantee that the men will be returned to their original bases once the crisis is over. You are our best general, Caius, so I’m confident the task I’m giving to you will be accomplished. But remember that those hispanic units haven’t seen any fighting in a long time, possibly since the year of the four emperors… You will need to retrain them to make them a proper military force if you want to achieve victory, but you will not have enough time to do so…”

 

[AussieHawker]

This looks like a really good TL.

 

[Silver]

Liked reading the new chapter. I hope that the Romans utterly and decisively defeat/crush any and all Germanian resistance so as to ensure the security of that part of the Roman Empire. I also hope that the Roman Emperors from Emperor Hadrian and onwards that they make it a permanent policy to constantly depopulate the Germanian tribes residing near the Roman borders as well as making it a permanent policy to create Roman military colonies in Germania/Central Europe so as to not only incrementally increase Roman territory in Germania/Central Europe over time, but also to exponentially further the process of Romanisation on conquered Germanian peoples and other future barbarian tribes. Please keep up the good work. Thank you.

 

[LeCHVCK]

Liked reading the new chapter. I hope that the Romans utterly and decisively defeat/crush any and all Germanian resistance so as to ensure the security of that part of the Roman Empire. I also hope that the Roman Emperors from Emperor Hadrian and onwards that they make it a permanent policy to constantly depopulate the Germanian tribes residing near the Roman borders as well as making it a permanent policy to create Roman military colonies in Germania/Central Europe so as to not only incrementally increase Roman territory in Germania/Central Europe over time, but also to exponentially further the process of Romanisation on conquered Germanian peoples and other future barbarian tribes. Please keep up the good work. Thank you.

Not worth it there's a reason why Caesar didn't go for it and Tiberius abandoned it. It's full of trees and hostile population. The Rhine is good governable border all you need to guard it is a bunch of boats. And without Germanic tribes who's gonna destroy Rome?

 

[Hecatee]

Well, as I said earlier, I don't plan on a conquest of new areas. The empire is already overstretched, with lots of lands still in need of stabilization : northern Britannia, Pannonia Inferior (the new one, between Danube and Dacia), Dacia, Roxolania, the troubled near-east (the Quietus revolt was only 10 years before, and the Bar Kokhba revolt will start in less than ten years) , the recently pacified Mauretania (from which they are taking forces away to temporarily replace the spanish defense forces)... Also it was not the spirit of the period : Hadrian wanted to consolidate his borders, Antoninus Pius did the same, Marcus Aurelius only waged forward defense warfare against the Germans...

On the other hand they could well depopulate an area along the border, with some sort of control system in place in this no man's land (towers or small camps on rivers tributary to the Danube and Rhine) to control trade and prevent the re-population of the area and act as a trip wire in case of new attacks. It is a solution they sometime adopted if you look at the roman treaties with barbarians in the 2nd and 3rd century.

 

[Silver]

And without Germanic tribes who's gonna destroy Rome?

Why should Rome be destroyed? For once I would just like to see an ATL where Rome and by extension its empire continue to exist and thrive - perhaps even to the present day.

 

[Hecatee]

Well if this thread does garner enough support I might find the energy to bring it quite far. Would Rome survive ? Maybe not "the" Rome, but maybe "a" Rome, helped by the weakening of the German tribes and more buffer space around its main centers. One could conceive a China like stability on the longer term, but I'm certainly not that far with my conception of this timeline

 

[LeCHVCK]

Why should Rome be destroyed? For once I would just like to see an ATL where Rome and by extension its empire continue to exist and thrive - perhaps even to the present day.

Rome surviving? No technical advance? Slavery to today? A very shitty economy to present day? Rome was a very bad place to live in. If all of Europe remains united it becomes a second China very advanced but no advancement and in difference to China there's no potential for Industrial Revolution. Also America gets never discovered etc.

 

[Xenophonte]

SPQR

Why should Rome be destroyed? For once I would just like to see an ATL where Rome and by extension its empire continue to exist and thrive - perhaps even to the present day.

100% Agree.

Long live the Senatus Populusque Romae!!!

While there we comment; We are many PhiloRomæ

Continue this excellent timeline.

 

[Silver]

Rome surviving? No technical advance? Slavery to today? A very shitty economy to present day? Rome was a very bad place to live in. If all of Europe remains united it becomes a second China very advanced but no advancement and in difference to China there's no potential for Industrial Revolution. Also America gets never discovered etc.

Who's to say Rome will not advance technologically or that slavery will finally be outlawed in the Roman Empire or all the other stuff you've mentioned so far? Not me and definitely not you.

 

[LeCHVCK]

Who's to say Rome will not advance technologically or that slavery will finally be outlawed in the Roman Empire or all the other stuff you've mentioned so far? Not me and definitely not you.

It can't advance it didn't really advance in its existence without pressure to advance because of existential threats tech can't advance. The tech also can't advance because there are enough slaves. Why build steam machines if there is enough wood and cheap workers? And the trading through the Mediterranean Sea declined ever since it all was Roman. A collapse of Rome with successor states everywhere and a bunch of Germanic kingdoms and a basic Rome in Italy with either Carthage or Dalmatia why not.

 

[Xenophonte]

Worst Present? Really?

Rome surviving? No technical advance? Slavery to today? A very shitty economy to present day? Rome was a very bad place to live in. If all of Europe remains united it becomes a second China very advanced but no advancement and in difference to China there's no potential for Industrial Revolution. Also America gets never discovered etc.

With respect to the industrial revolution and the discovery of America, are events far into the future as unpredictable to their speculation (is as good or
fetched as any other for or against Rome) .About this be worse or not, is a 'interesting' feedback given European history from the fall of Rome to the present day ..., Feudalism, religious intolerance, religious wars , conquest and colonialism, two world wars, Racisms, The Shoah, etc.
Finally human nature is one, there is no historical Eras worse than others ... just pay attention to the news the last few days.

 

[DominusNovus]

It can't advance it didn't really advance in its existence without pressure to advance because of existential threats tech can't advance. The tech also can't advance because there are enough slaves. Why build steam machines if there is enough wood and cheap workers? And the trading through the Mediterranean Sea declined ever since it all was Roman. A collapse of Rome with successor states everywhere and a bunch of Germanic kingdoms and a basic Rome in Italy with either Carthage or Dalmatia why not.

On what do you base the idea that the romans did not advance?

Their military evolved quite effectively with the times. The legions of the later empire bore little resemblence to that of their predecessors. Their government contimued to evolve and innovate throughout both the Republican and Imperial eras (admittedly, ours idtory is colored by writers who preferred to downplay that). Their culture evolved from a very parochial Pagan society into a cosmpolitan Christian society. While their innovations technologically are not as renowned (those gh certainly present), they were able and rapid adopters and reciners of technology developed by others.

The only thing inherently anti-progress in Roman society were the attitudes of many of our first hand sources.

 

[DominusNovus]

Why should Rome be destroyed? For once I would just like to see an ATL where Rome and by extension its empire continue to exist and thrive - perhaps even to the present day.

My Three Alexanders timeline is working to extend the life of the Republic as far as I can manage. We'll see how far that can go.

 

[LeCHVCK]

On what do you base the idea that the romans did not advance?

Their military evolved quite effectively with the times. The legions of the later empire bore little resemblence to that of their predecessors. Their government contimued to evolve and innovate throughout both the Republican and Imperial eras (admittedly, ours idtory is colored by writers who preferred to downplay that). Their culture evolved from a very parochial Pagan society into a cosmpolitan Christian society. While their innovations technologically are not as renowned (those gh certainly present), they were able and rapid adopters and reciners of technology developed by others.

The only thing inherently anti-progress in Roman society were the attitudes of many of our first hand sources.

My Idea is based on the superiority of the Greek culture. Steam machines, the Agon something which did not exist in Roman culture, Philosophy: We only have Seneca and Horaz but the Greeks have Epikur, Zenon, Socrates etc. Also do you know any Roman universal Genie like Archimedes and Thales of Milet. A rich upper class who refuses to trade and instead go farming is also against progress

 

[DominusNovus]

The superiority of Greek culture? How delightfully chauvinistic. Of course, the greeks did such a good job of ordering their society, how could anyone ever doubt how superior their culture was? It was truly the cleverest of ruses that they were able to settle all their political disputes by the simple expedient of being utterly conquered by their nearest neighboring culture (a culture that, as part of this greek scheme, beat the greeks with their very own style of warfare). The stupid Romans went through the trouble and exertion of conquering the known world in their own! If only they had adopted he wisdom of the greeks and spent the majority of their culture's independent existence in civil strife...

Im sure that Cicero, Marcus Aurelius, Origen, Julian, Augustine, and Boethius will be intrigued to know that they weren't Romans.

By the way, what did the Greeks ever do with their Heronic steam engines?

Of course, your supposed point does mot address the fact that all evidence indicates that the Romans were quite adaptive.