That was great
Genuinely really interesting turn of events to see the rise of a counter to the war hawks rising at the right moment. It'll be interesting to see the further evolution of the influence of public writings going forward.
That is a solid peace considering what was considered - I wonder what ideas will be born in the aftermath of Genoa - I don't think that particular conflict is over, I think it will return, and could be the hotbed of anti-oligarchal thought, some sort of popular or even communal/communist republic doesn't seem outlandish to me. Hardly the Soviet Union but an interesting note alongside OTL idea of the Levellers in the UK for sure.
I am interested in the size of Roman... Rome. Roman Latium? Handing over a swathe to Sicily was a good call but it'll be interesting to see how feasible the city will be in terms of growth. I can't imagine it'll suffer for Sicily next door, but it might have issues if it tries to expand beyond the Roman limits. That'll be an interesting scenario for sure.
I am surprised at the results of the war games though, I'd have expected a fortified Italy to frankly do better, but that might be simply an assumption of the fortifications. I do like how that was broken down - and it really starts to sell a not-just-anti-latin justification for the general siege mentality for the Romans in the future. Its the geopolitical realities of it.
That diplomatic reform is gooooooood, I like how its essentially 5+1, that could be really interesting. I'm curious as to the split for the West that took it from 4+1 to 5+1 - was that to accommodate the New World? I appreciate that it isn't that important for the Romans, but last I checked the Mexicans were a Roman ally in the New World, and that's a very different field to the rest of the world diplomatically.
All in all, it's great to see things appearing to return to some sense of calm, Spain and Arles being more on side is good, and I'm genuinely shocked that Henri didn't try to stir the pot in some way to prevent that outcome. Sure he has an ally/partner in Genoa, and probably Lombardy I expect in the longer-term, but letting those relationships return to normal isn't really in his interest. Perhaps we've seen via omission Henri actually not get what he wants in diplomacy?
I do hope at some point Ody and Chapuys (or maybe Athena and Chapuys) can have a nice session to patch things up though. It'd be funny if "No More Chapuys" becomes a byword in the Roman Foreign Office, for never creating that situation, ever again. Maybe a small statue.
I like the idea of federalisation personally - I endorse it, but my concern would be why - especially for Sicily. Short of an economic crisis that, like in Egypt, effectively forces Sicily to come to the Romans for help, I'm not sure what advantages it gives. I can see Egypt more easily,
The main approach I could see which COULD work would be dependent on how it worked for Egypt - if its essentially that Egypt becomes a subservient state, I doubt it'd be useful - but if you had some sort of structure where Egypt isn't so much a vassal as an equal partner, but that the Emperor resolves ties, that might have legs - crisis in Sicily that the price tag is membership of this structure? Crisis in Serbia might open the door as well for them.
But I'll admit I'm not entirely sure at the moment what powers the Romans have in Sicily. The idea of enforcing dual-language schools is a good idea for it, but I think the first aspect would be to push a sort of SuperCulture - As British is to English and Scottish, Roman becomes to Sicilian, Greek, Melkite, etc. Now that is easier to do via simple propaganda, and has precedent with the concept of Romanitas. Now I'm unsure how that has evolved in the Empire but if we assume that it could, "independently" of the Emperor push that idea, but as the concept of a Federation Romanitas with the Empire as a member, alongside Egypt, Sicily, Serbia, Vlachia (feel free to cross out any), that serves as a way to formalise the idea as a political entity.
Basic model as I'd see it - headed by the Emperor of the Romans. It has it's own budget and obligations to its members, and in effect would serve as a significant reform of the relationship between the Romans and the Despotates and maybe even other allies - nothing says that a FR needs to be single-tiered structure
I'd expect the Romans to be T1, with the most obligations, benefits, and restrictions.
T2 would be Egypt - essentially where foreign policies get deeply restricted.
T3 Sicily (T2 after a crisis perhaps), and Carthage (it actually makes sense unless Africa changes for the Carthaginians to have relative freedom diplomatically on the ground at least)
T4 being allies who want to be a little closer - something like Serbia, or Vlachia.
General model - closer to the top tier, more power in decisions, lower tier, less restrictions on their own actions.
The big question for me is where do the various parts of the Exarchate in the East fall in this? Sure they aren't a Depotate, and in real terms are part of the Empire proper, but I can see in such a system it could be reorganised into a T2+. Essentially a T2 member, but it doesn't have any potential rights of withdrawal. It raises questions as to whether that is enough.
That's a model I can see, and for a good while the Romans would essentially dominate it but at the same time there are benefits - see Vlachia for example, probably the best example for why someone might choose to join. A T4 relationship could involve subsidies, not something that'll happen TODAY (and with the Roman economy as it is, that entire issue may end for Vlachia) but if the economic pattern continues, a pattern of subsidies and free movement could be of benefit for them, partly to reflect reality, but also to ensure they can take those subsidies to change that pattern without indebting themselves to anyone.
On the topic of Vlachia, I can't recall - who is dominating merchant activity on the Danube at the moment? Are the Vlachs in a position to take advantage of that quiet in the next decade or so?
That is a solid peace considering what was considered - I wonder what ideas will be born in the aftermath of Genoa - I don't think that particular conflict is over, I think it will return, and could be the hotbed of anti-oligarchal thought, some sort of popular or even communal/communist republic doesn't seem outlandish to me. Hardly the Soviet Union but an interesting note alongside OTL idea of the Levellers in the UK for sure.
I am interested in the size of Roman... Rome. Roman Latium? Handing over a swathe to Sicily was a good call but it'll be interesting to see how feasible the city will be in terms of growth. I can't imagine it'll suffer for Sicily next door, but it might have issues if it tries to expand beyond the Roman limits. That'll be an interesting scenario for sure.
I am surprised at the results of the war games though, I'd have expected a fortified Italy to frankly do better, but that might be simply an assumption of the fortifications. I do like how that was broken down - and it really starts to sell a not-just-anti-latin justification for the general siege mentality for the Romans in the future. Its the geopolitical realities of it.
That diplomatic reform is gooooooood, I like how its essentially 5+1, that could be really interesting. I'm curious as to the split for the West that took it from 4+1 to 5+1 - was that to accommodate the New World? I appreciate that it isn't that important for the Romans, but last I checked the Mexicans were a Roman ally in the New World, and that's a very different field to the rest of the world diplomatically.
All in all, it's great to see things appearing to return to some sense of calm, Spain and Arles being more on side is good, and I'm genuinely shocked that Henri didn't try to stir the pot in some way to prevent that outcome. Sure he has an ally/partner in Genoa, and probably Lombardy I expect in the longer-term, but letting those relationships return to normal isn't really in his interest. Perhaps we've seen via omission Henri actually not get what he wants in diplomacy?
I do hope at some point Ody and Chapuys (or maybe Athena and Chapuys) can have a nice session to patch things up though. It'd be funny if "No More Chapuys" becomes a byword in the Roman Foreign Office, for never creating that situation, ever again. Maybe a small statue.
What are the paths for Rhomania to integrate Sicily and Egypt permanently and do away with this despotate system?
This kinda shows that even Rhomania's buddies are fair weather friends.
Federalization. Have the Imperial government give up power and give autonomy to various provinces, give them limited taxation powers, and give their representatives authority to influence imperial policy.
I like the idea of federalisation personally - I endorse it, but my concern would be why - especially for Sicily. Short of an economic crisis that, like in Egypt, effectively forces Sicily to come to the Romans for help, I'm not sure what advantages it gives. I can see Egypt more easily,
The main approach I could see which COULD work would be dependent on how it worked for Egypt - if its essentially that Egypt becomes a subservient state, I doubt it'd be useful - but if you had some sort of structure where Egypt isn't so much a vassal as an equal partner, but that the Emperor resolves ties, that might have legs - crisis in Sicily that the price tag is membership of this structure? Crisis in Serbia might open the door as well for them.
But I'll admit I'm not entirely sure at the moment what powers the Romans have in Sicily. The idea of enforcing dual-language schools is a good idea for it, but I think the first aspect would be to push a sort of SuperCulture - As British is to English and Scottish, Roman becomes to Sicilian, Greek, Melkite, etc. Now that is easier to do via simple propaganda, and has precedent with the concept of Romanitas. Now I'm unsure how that has evolved in the Empire but if we assume that it could, "independently" of the Emperor push that idea, but as the concept of a Federation Romanitas with the Empire as a member, alongside Egypt, Sicily, Serbia, Vlachia (feel free to cross out any), that serves as a way to formalise the idea as a political entity.
Basic model as I'd see it - headed by the Emperor of the Romans. It has it's own budget and obligations to its members, and in effect would serve as a significant reform of the relationship between the Romans and the Despotates and maybe even other allies - nothing says that a FR needs to be single-tiered structure
I'd expect the Romans to be T1, with the most obligations, benefits, and restrictions.
T2 would be Egypt - essentially where foreign policies get deeply restricted.
T3 Sicily (T2 after a crisis perhaps), and Carthage (it actually makes sense unless Africa changes for the Carthaginians to have relative freedom diplomatically on the ground at least)
T4 being allies who want to be a little closer - something like Serbia, or Vlachia.
General model - closer to the top tier, more power in decisions, lower tier, less restrictions on their own actions.
The big question for me is where do the various parts of the Exarchate in the East fall in this? Sure they aren't a Depotate, and in real terms are part of the Empire proper, but I can see in such a system it could be reorganised into a T2+. Essentially a T2 member, but it doesn't have any potential rights of withdrawal. It raises questions as to whether that is enough.
That's a model I can see, and for a good while the Romans would essentially dominate it but at the same time there are benefits - see Vlachia for example, probably the best example for why someone might choose to join. A T4 relationship could involve subsidies, not something that'll happen TODAY (and with the Roman economy as it is, that entire issue may end for Vlachia) but if the economic pattern continues, a pattern of subsidies and free movement could be of benefit for them, partly to reflect reality, but also to ensure they can take those subsidies to change that pattern without indebting themselves to anyone.
On the topic of Vlachia, I can't recall - who is dominating merchant activity on the Danube at the moment? Are the Vlachs in a position to take advantage of that quiet in the next decade or so?