⚔ SPQR Shop, excellent hand-crafted Roman rings and other items: spqrshop.com?sca_ref=4770010.FM16q4LJHr Enter the code "Maiorianus" to get a 20% discount on every purchase. The ideal present for any fan of Rome 😉!
@progresstothestars Byzantine at the time simply refused to acknowledge "Barbaric Kingdoms" as actually Roman. Even if many of them stay loyal to Emperor and continue Roman institutions and speak Latin. It is worth to menton that it was Byzantine who invited Longobards. Most likely with specific intention of preventing rise of West Rome. Unfortunately for them they forget about Franks, who basically continue Roman mandate and later restored Empire. With support of Roman Patriarchy, what become increasingly conflicted with Patriarchy of Constantinople and abandoned to Longobard threat. Ironically in the end title of East Emperor was transferred to Spain (Hapsburgs). Resulting with famous battle of Vienna.
In short. West Rome did not actually fall, because "Barbaric Kings" were actually not as barbaric as Byzantine propaganda claimed. In fact Vandals also were pro-Roman faction and the reason why Latin was preserved in Africa. With Byzantine destroying them, Africa was lost permanently as they could not hold it. And while fall of Ostrogoths end city of Rome, it didn't end Roman population in other territories. As Franks and Visigoths also preserved Latin culture. So there is a continuity between Charlemagne and Late Rome, even if not direct. And for reminder Byzantine over time become fully Greek.
@progresstothestars Yes, most people not realize that West is literally the West Rome. But I'm not sure what you mean by East in this case? Russia is a and always was a hair of Mongol Empire. I'm not sure who would hold the mantle after all of Austria-Hungary? Maybe Poland? Unfortunately you must be more specific. East struggle because incompetent and corrupted rulers and constant invasions of the Orde. Not some Western conspiracy.
@progresstothestars Yes, most people not realize that West is literally the West Rome. But I'm not sure what you mean by East in this case? Russia is a and always was a hair of Mongol Empire. I'm not sure who would hold the mantle after all of Austria-Hungary? Maybe Poland? Unfortunately you must be more specific. East struggle because incompetent and corrupted rulers and constant invasions of the Orde. Not some Western conspiracy.
A Romano-Gothic culture? Nah, the Goths were the warrior minority, the Goths would share the same fate as the Lombards, they’ll mingle and assimilate into Latin culture due to being a minority, also due to Latin’s much stronger prestige and as a way to legitimize ruling over the Romans of Italy.
the lombards get too much shit for what they were, they still significantly changed northern italy and italian clothing looked a lot more germanic after them
@@irgendwer3610 if by significantly changed you mean only leaving a few words into the italian language, clothing, and having an Italian region being named after them, that’s not saying too much to be honest. They were assimilated just like the Visigoths were. It is no coincidence that by the time Italy was last ruled by a Lombard ruler, he had a latin name, Desiderius.
@@scorpionfiresome3834 that sounds exactly what happened in france, the germanic tribes merged their identity into the local and left an imprint. A romano-gothic culture wouldn't be germanic, it would be latin speaking but with mixed roman and gothic traditions. This is also what happens when tuco-mongols conquer china by the way
I highly doubt Justinian invaded to restore the Roman empire, the east had been invading the west long before the west collapsed for whatever reason they felt like.
Ikr. He not only did that, the bastard literally broke the Eastern Empire's budget and treasury to do it. He didn't give Belisarius enough men first, then sent Narses and John together when he did, while keeping his orders to them vague enough to allow them to challenge Belisarius. North Africa was good because it was taken without as much brutal warfare.
Ahhh, the two extremes of studying Justinian: - OMG HE WAS THE BEST EMPEROR EVER WHO RESTORED THE WESTERN PROVINCES, BUILT THE HAGIA SOPHIA, GOT THOSE SILK WORMS FROM CHINA, MADE THE PENTARCHY AND JUSTINIAN CODE! - NOOOOOO HIS WARS RAVAGED ITALY, EMPTIED THE TREASURY, THE PLAGUE OCCURED, ANTIOCH GOT SACKED, AND (checks notes from Procopius) MARRIED A WHORE! The reasonable position lies between these two extremes. The first half of his reign lay more in line with the former, while the second half was more in line with the latter.
Yeah i feel like the ostrogoths didnt deserve it. His invasion of italy is one of the things i dont like about his reign. Italy would of been so interesting had Justinian not came in and ruined it all. After that, Italy was a shit hole of different people. Saracens, Italians, lombards, franks, papal states, Yuck. The Ostrogoths were the only ones keeping italy unified. After they fell it just sucked.
@@inactivated101 The Ostrogoths were breaking down into wars, their kings after Theodoric were more and more barbaric, and frankly, it is hard to see them staying in charge for long. Justinian's reconquest of Italy would have stuck and Italy would have been reintegrated fully into the empire if not for the Lombards.
If you're stopping the invasion by going back to 534 or 535, you may as well warn Justinian of the coming famine and plague. With even a little preparation time, the Eastern Empire would be able to ride out the natural disasters with fewer casualties and an enhanced reputation. A reputation that can be leveraged into an even more motivated army, ready to launch invasions of Persia and perhaps the Ostrogoths in their moment of weakness in the 540s. An Eastern Empire with both Egypt and Mesopotamia as breadbaskets would be very wealthy and capable of defending against the Muslim invasions. The Zagros mountains as an eastern border would be easy to hold against the forces beyond, while holding a port on the Arabian Gulf could allow easier trade with India.
Also help Belisarius win the battle of Callinicum resulting in a peace in Rome’s favor and invade North Africa Sicily Sardinia and Corsica Dalmatia and the Balearic islands but warn not to invade Italy due to the plague and volcanic winter of 536
They lost Egypt to the caliphate. Also can't do anything about a plague that develops around water in your mediterranean empire. Warn Nicephorus about the Bulgur ambush if you want a properly repopulated empire with loyal subjects, instead of the fake expanded borders Basil the great gave them.
Personally, I preferred the idea of the Roman Empire did not abandon Britain more because when it is indeed fractured, the domain of Soissons will included the Roman territory on the British Isles as well. So even if the Franks and the Visigoths managed to conquer this de facto independent remnant of the Roman Province of Gaul, escaping across the English Channel will still be an option. And when they did, a chance to revive the Western Roman Empire still be there. Of course, the consolidation of power will be the first priority. And such a task might taken a generation at least. But when it ended, the entirety of what we known as England and Wales will be part of the Roman Province of Britannia, which is a de facto independent Roman province at this point. But as the navy for the campaign to reclaim Gaul is being constructed, the new wave of migration of the Angles, the Saxons and the Jutes to Britain from the Jutland peninsula occurred. So instead of using this navy for the reconquest of Gaul as intended, the situation forced this navy to be used as a defensive barrier against the invasion forces from the Jutland peninsula instead. And of course, some of these newcomers did not arrive as invaders but simply as immigrants who seek for opportunities to find new homes and make money to feed themselves. So there will be some who will definitely be welcomed to Britannia. But in exchange, they have to pledge the allegiance to the Consul of the Western Roman in Londinium as long as they remained on the island. Some of these immigrants may even entered the services within the military while others simply settled down as farmers or craftsmen. At the same time, the Romano-Britannian government may also have to deal with the Picts from the north, thus forcing the Hadrian Walls to be repaired and garrisons to be established at the northern frontier. When the situation becomes stable once again, the reconquest of Gaul is launched at the near end of the 6th century. Most likely when King Childebert II died, resulting in a civil war between his sons. So by taking advantage of this civil war, it will become easier for the Romano-Britannian forces to reclaim Gaul and officially revived the Western Roman Empire. And even if the entirety of Gaul is not reconquered if the two sons of the previous Frankish King decided to joined forces together to confront the invaders, the significant portion of Gaul would have already be taken. And to ensure it will remained that way, a treaty will be drafted between the Western Roman Consul and the Frankish King. In the aftermath of this treaty, the current Consul of the Western Roman Empire is officially proclaimed an Emperor and a regalia is dispatched to Constantinople to confirm the existence of the Western Roman Empire.
Pretty much all that your alternative timeline requires is that agents sympathetic to Riothamus intercept the communications between Arvandus & Euric, king of the Visigoths that urged Euric to stop peace negotiations with the Western Empire and attack their ally, Riothamus, instead.
@@ari3903 It is based from that too. However, it has my own twists to it such as the need to deal with the migration from the peoples from Jutland first.
I find one alternate history of the Ostrogoths even more amazing. Theodoric the Great was an Ostrogoth but he was raised in Constantinople and very much Romanized. He didn't officially proclaim himself a Western Roman Emperor, but he appointed Roman officials(Praefects I think), and ruled pretty much like a Roman emperor. What if he did proclaim himself a Western Roman Emperor and restored the empire to it's former glory and his dynasty stayed in charge? Sure, these emperors would be Germanic, but they preserved the architecture and institutions of the Romans very well, and in this Gothic Empire, the senate and people of Rome would live on unlike with the Eastern Roman Empire.
There are splendid in-depth series about the Justinianaean reconquest, the Goths and Latin-Germanic culture that I strongly recommend. Hope to see a coop as well
I've always wondered; what would've happened had Theodosius, (the son of Ataulf and Galla Placidia), had survived. You would've had a male ruler who Gothic king with the blood of the Theodosian House in them. Or just Ataulf not dying by assassination and he and Galla having more kids. Would have made for a very interesting what if. A "Western Rome" ruled by a Gothic King but potentially stylizing himself as a Roman Emperor, (either independent or junior Augustus to the East). Most of the Roman Administrative apparatus working while the state is defended by a Gothic host loyal not to a chieftain in the employ of Rome but loyal to her sovereign.
3:55 That kind of Rome would have been fascinating to explore. I'm utterly mesmerized by exploring deserted ruins of once busy places, and that sounds like a dream come true to me!
This was part of the story of "Lest Darkness Fall," wherein a modern archeologist slips through time to this period. The Byzantines still attack, but the story's main character offers his services to the Goths and beats the Easterners. In the epilogue, it is mentioned that the Burgundians and Visigoths are in negotiations for a unified Romano-Gothic state.
Rome Total War Age of Justinian Mod... Got the Persians out of the way, still invaded North Africa and took out the Vandals. Then I made friendly with the other inland North African tribes and invaded Hispania while making friendly with the Ostrogoths. while I was doing that, the Franks attacked Ostrogothic Italy. Then I was able to be the hero and this time actually march into Italy as a savior. Rome was recaptured without struggle and immediately rebuilt :)
Belisarius needed to stop in Africa and intergrade the Goths as the Western Roman empire. Then together, retake the rest of the empire. Thank you for this vid. Its a topic I often contemplated in my head
You definitely would have great relations with Sassanid Perisa, considering Maurice's death was the cause of the 20 year terrible war. Maurice had helped put him on the Sassanid throne. Who knows maybe the 2 Empires become even closer. Yes you're right, that's a video
@@christopherevans2445 Also the fact that Maurice had plans to kind of restore the old system of two emperors, one in the west and one in the east. He wanted to combine the Exarchates of Africa and Ravenna into a reborn Western Roman empire.
@@onemoreminute0543 Yes you are right. And I always felt after the restoration of the west, it really needed a western emperor, or at least a Caesar colleague.
@@christopherevans2445 But wouldn't Khosrau II find another excuse to invade if it wasn't for Maurice's death? In my eyes, even without Phocas, the empire would still lose Syria and Egypt, maybe even sooner without him, due to the fact that the Romans probably wouldn't get an emperor as competent as Heraclius Don't get me wrong, Phocas was a bad emperor, but the idea that his incompetence was catastrophic to the empire, like Alexios III was, seems to be a little unwarranted
I feel like the crowning of a Romano-Gothic Emperor would only have happened if a schism between east & west still occured. Or by an opportunistic Gothic king in a time of crisis in Byzantium. For example: crowning an emperor in the west while Constantinople was under siege by the Sassanids, Bulgarians, Arabs, etc. And then sending an envoy to the Eastern Emperor demanding recognision as "brother-Emperor in the west" in return for military aid.
I can imagine Genoa and Venice being very different in this Timeline. Maybe even a state like Pisa would have emerged as a dominant commercial power instead.
If you have any interest in a more economic-centric approach, consider this option: Justinian takes the resources he would have spent reconquering Italy and instead digs the Suez Canal 1300 years early (no Canal of the Pharaohs BS, a proper canal for ocean going ships), an entirely feasible engineering project (consider that, in terms of mass moved, it’d be much simpler than building Hadrian’s Wall). With the tax revenue from increased trade, the Empire is more dominant in the Mediterranean, and easily projects power into the Red Sea. Establishing friendly relations with Axum, the Empire could patrol the sea and keep it free of pirates, especially after it clientalizes the city states of the Hejaz. With control over the bread baskets of Egypt and North Africa, the Empire could gradually erode the autonomy of the Ostrogoths in Italy. On the flip side, the increased trade likely means the plague hits harder, but at least the increased trade should also help recovery efforts.
Great episode. I always wondered this. What if Belisarius took the Ostrogothic offer to become ruler and United North Africa and Italy again? With a Roman general back in charge plus control of the grain supply, would love to see a what if episode on that.
One critical difference not mentioned here if the gothic wars had not happened is the Papacy. As we know in our timeline, as a result of the collapse in the secular order in Italy, the Papacy gained political power, prestige, and land around Rome. (For example, who is Pontus Maximus today, and the fake Donations of Constantine?) One reason why Italy was not united until 1870 was that the Papacy did everything possible to prevent it. A good example of what would happen in this alternative timeline, is in Constantinople (where the secular authority existed until 1452, and even then it was replaced by the Moslem Ottomans) the Orthodox Patriarch never had the same political power as the Pope in Rome.
The Gothic Wars, one of history's decisive epoch changing wars. There aren't many and even fewer battles but they are there for historians to ponder. Well done on illuminating one.
The entire reconquista of the old imperial lands was a giant mistake, vast amounts of men, money and time were lost that could have been used to strenghten the empire but instead it only weakened it, now they had bigger borders that now included devastated depopulated land, had a much smaller and exausted by constant warfare millitary + the plague hit. If I remember corectly (probably not) this was the cause of the begining of the end for the eastern empire. EDIT: ok you said that in the video, I commented before watching to the end :P
Good points. Waisting resources on far lands, reminds me of what America is doing instead of making the big cities a safe place to live. (So sad what is happening in San Francisco, CA)
@@cathyf.2672 nah mate, the American empire needs to protect it's interesis in Europe, Middle East and the Pacific, otherwise it will fall HARD. Make no mistake if it is not stopped China will rise and take it's place and it will not be pretty.
It would have completly changed the history of Italy. It would have meant a stronger gothic Italy being able to resist a longboard invasion (if indeed it would have actually happened) and a less fragmented north without the communes. henceforth without most likely the economic powerhouses of Venice, Milan and Genoa. History would have been very different and most likely Italy would have reached a national identity much earlier.
18:40 the Crusades wouldn't have happened anyway in a scenario where Islam couldn't arise out of a power vacuum from a depleted Byzantine Empire. Justinian's reckless spending and overreach laid the foundation for crisis to happen in the years preceding the rise of Islam.
History could have played out much, much better than it did. There was so much needless suffering and lost progress because of how this all went down. We may not have gotten the worst possible timeline, but we did not get a good one.
I believe it was Doctor Who that said You Cannot Alter The End, Time Travel does not work this way. The inner fighting between Ostrogoth nobles would led to more severe civil war through out Italian Peninsula. An older, more paranoid Justinian would not trust Belisarius as he would in our timeline, instead sent him equal command to other less capable generals to conquer Italia. War would not be as swift as our timeline, but dragged on and inflicted more suffering.
@@hollyingraham3980 I made a point that war, conflict, and sufferings are part of history, most likely a result of human nature and the environment the ones in power, say Ostrogoth nobles, created. The end result of alternate universe comes the same, and it is up to us to embrace this as a part of our own, learn from true history. For example, the biggest what-if in human civilization I think would be the Bronze Age Collapse. With that period, whatever the cause, if damage properly controlled and limited, perhaps we as a civil society would be better off today.
The effect of the Gothic War was still seen in Rome today, so if there were no Gothic Wars, then Rome today would not have crumbling pillars and having fallen ones loitering everywhere. The senate building would look different, and ancient monuments repaired.
The Ostrogoths offered Belisarius the crown of the West. If Justinian accepted Belisarius becoming Emperor of the West (Italy, Africa and southern Spain), the West would have recovered under Belisarius' rule. And maybe he would have defeated the Franks and Visigoths and reconquered Gaul and Spain.
What if Belisarius was given a chance, got enough troops to finish the war before the Sassanids attacked, given extra time to finish the war before being transferred to the Sassanid front or even what if the Sassanids never attacked?
Theodorich was an exception of Gothic rulers to value Roman culture. If his successors continued the same politics, Justinian would never atack Italy. Anyway, for Constantinopolis it would be very inconvenient to have connections with Sardinia without having Sicily, so they would probably have to take it from Goths anyway.
The Ostrogoths were still by and large stanning for Rome post - Theodoric. Amalasuintha was as pro - Justinian as you could get. It was _her_ death that gave Justinian the _casus belli_ to come in and inadvertently wreck the joint.
" If his successors continued the same politics, Justinian would never atack Italy. " They did. Amalasunta received the classical education and was fluent both in Latin and Greek. Theodahad - the last Ostrogothic ruler before the Eastern Roman invasion - as a great admirer of Neoplatonic philosophy was a philosopher-king, not unlike of Marcus Aurelius.
To achieve the "Romano-Gothic" kingdom of the West, two things would have to happen. A joining of the two royal houses of the Visigoths and Ostrogoths, and the abandonment of Arian Christianity by the Ostrogoths.
I like this video. It’s always fun to think “what if”! Although this video doesn’t address the Romano-Persian war that occurs in the 7th century that leads to the rise of Islam. Would Hispania and more importantly North Africa be able to withstand the Muslim onslaught?
Can you make again an alternate reality? Belisarius and the Roman Kingdom (with the will of Justinian), Vitiges and the Ostrogothic Kingdom (with the Catholic faith), Altava and the Berber Kingdom (with Africa and the Islands)?
In short, the Goths would become the new noble families of the Western Half: military generals, governors and senators. The local populace would also participate. The main issue of both Goths is religious since they were Arians, but I could see them becoming Nicean considering that is what the Franks and Visigoths did anyways. The other issue would be: are the Goths a viceroy of the Eastern Empire, an Equal as the Western Emperor / Rex Romanorum, or an independent entity claiming the title of Roman Emperor? Depending on the choice, west and east will have some territorial disputes such as North Africa, which was always part of the western half. Depopulation of Italy would happen anyways, there's no way to stop the plagues and famines of that time, but would be on a lesser quantity considering there would be no war.
Not true. They acknowledged the divinity of christ but stated it was not the same level as God the father. Instead of being of the SAME substance, they were of SIMILAR substance, the difference in the words in Greek is the letter 'i' - called iota in Greek. We get the phrase, 'couldn't care a jot' from this peculiarity. regardless, the Ostrogoths were arians, not athanasians. And frankly, the Arians were far more logical that the incredible mental gymnastics it took to explain the current version of the holy trinity. Mind you, personally, the whole concept of God and divinity is both massively illogical, scientifically impossible and utterly irrelevant in learning how to lead a good life. Like all Christians, I disbelieve in all other gods - the only difference being I believe in the existence of one less god than christians. hope you aren't an American evangelical. If so, I apologize in advance if my personal attitudes offend your beliefs. @@daguroswaldson257
I can already imagine in that alternate timeline Justinian would launch a conquest against the Sassanid Empire and its allies on the east with the backing of the Ostrogothic Kingdom who would provide Justinian an army of hardy gothic soldiers to serve as the elite army of the Eastern Roman Empire whose strength would be similar that to the Varangian Guard of Emperor Basil II.
ERE should've consolidated their reconquests in Africa. They surrounded the Italian Peninsula which could've pressured the Ostrogoths to vassalage or negotiations. There's no way that the Ostrogoths were going to win over the still cohesive and empire-loyal Italian roman society. Heck, a simple grain dole or sponsorship from the ERE would seal the loyalty of Rome/Italy to Constantinople.
Your map of a union of the Visigoth and Ostrogoth differs only towards the end of the novel Less Darkness Fall the Burgundians is part of that state due to a revolt engineered by the Ostrogoths.
It's entirely possible that the Roman-Sasanian wars would not have resumed, leading to the Rashidun Caliphate being unable to conquer Persia and much of Rome (the Caliphate's conquests, after all, were preceded by the Roman-Sasanian War of 602-628).
A stronger Eastern Rome probably puts up a much stiffer fight against the Arab invasions. In turn, the Ostrogoths confederate a weakened (but not destroyed) Visigoth state to re-form Western Rome. By the 740-750s, the Western Romans take advantage of the Berber Revolt/civil war inside the Caliphate to retake Carthage and most of North Africa.
At the time of the Arab invasions, ERE was as powerful as any other empire, it is a common misconception that it was weaker and the Arabs took advantage of it. Let's not forget, in every battle that the Romans faced the Arabs, they had twice the men. I don't want to give credit to the Arabs but it was impressive how they destroyed the Sassanids and ate the Romans.
Unfortunately, as the Quantum physicists say, "Unperformed experiments produce no results." All we can do is study what in fact happened, and try to prevent a new version of it from happening again!
Justnian had right idea... What in hell he expected Belisarius to do with 8000 men was another matter. Belisarius quickly winning Italy as he had Africa, and then smashing the Franks, was by no means unlikely, if given a decentbsized army. Justinian had a general worthy of Scipio, yet gave him a glorified bodyguard and some mercenaries to fight. Failing that, it would have been interesting if Belisarius had accepted the western crown at Ravenna, and led a Romano-Gothic army to smash the Franks and Burgundians, and possibly the Visigoths and Lombards.
Perhaps with Italy more unified and stronger, the Franks would have expanded only in the dirrection of germany/the north. The Frankish way of war would still exist and be powerful, and the Frankish desire for expansion and christianisation would also still exist, but with a stronger italy they would only expand north and east (and possibly even into britain). Perhaps Northern France might be more germanised or even fully germanic as this alternate frankish empire is more dominated by Germans even when it splits up between sons.
And now I am getting a better understanding of why western romans developed a sense of anger and disgust towards the Byzantines. These latter were constantly trying to sabotage any sort of political challenge to them in west. And they cry because our ancestors sacked Constantinople after all the bullshit they did. I cannot imagine just how irresponsible a part of the Roman elite was to just move the imperial center to the hellenistic east, give up territories to non roman populations, and continually invade and destroy western latin speaking regions. Now I see why non Greek speaking eastern romans opted for rule under Caliphs than under "Basilei".
This is why I like HRE more than ERE. ERE did more damage to Italy and the city of Rome than any barbarian invasion ever had. At least the HRE tried to restore Rome in its early days before it became dysfunctional. Without the ERE then WRE would have likely been restored or at least italy would have remained a whole nation with an intact roman culture + institutions.
Could you do a what if the son of Ataulf and Galla Placidia, Theodosius, survived and became Emperor? Would the WRE have become a Romano-Gothic Empire?
Justinian was right to take North Africa - easy conquest and easy to keep and defend. The East should have then been his focus that is how he places his empire on firm foundation. And then later Emperors can play around with Western expansion.
I think, sooner or later, there would be conflict over North Africa. But if the Western Roman Empire survives, or if it falls to someone besides Iustinianus, I think Theodoricus's policy of religious toleration would survive.
What do you think the odds are if they said surrender, you're not a king anymore, you're a governor now. Or else, war. Would they have gone for it? The Goths I mean.
This is why I don't consider Justinian "great" he got too power hungry and his Italian campaign led to so much unnecessary destruction while severely sapping the empire of it's wealth, the African campaign made so much more sense.
As a Swede and as such a ancestor of the cousins of the great Goths I am to some extent deeply offended by the fact that 1500 years later there are still a racist misunderstanding about their role in world history. Justinian I destroyed the stable government ushered in by the great liberator Odoacer! The Roman Empire was two failed states! And Justinian’s Empire is proof of that
There are a lot of unkowns in this story. The Ostrogothic kingdom would have been still under attack and would have fallen sooner or later. Everyone wanted to have Rome. The Franks, the Germans, the Muslims, the Byzanthine... maybe if it was a slow bleeding instead of a collapse, the city might have fared better. Still, even a united Latino-Gothic empire might have lacked the resources and manpower to last for a long time. Rome was always a prize to be won, no matter how run down and ruined it might become. Everybody would have kept attacking.
The volcanic eruption of 536 and Justianian's plague are the kind of events that one might call them "sheer bad luck". If these events had not happened, I would say that the empire would have had a very good chance of stabilizing the fronts and revitilizing Italy's devastated economy. speaking about human decisions- derived events, I think that had Phocas never risen to power, the empire would be in considerably better shape and might have secured its possesions in Egypt and the Levant from the Persians and the Arabs.
Great video man! However I find the opening to be a bit draged out and could be a video on it's own. Describing the city of rome from it's inception and skip 100 ish years each time and see how it changes. As first minutes doesn't have much with the rest of the video to do.
Do you really think the British would have been driven completely out of Gaul by 600? It seems a bit unlikely when you consider how long their descendants stayed there in reality.
Sebastian Maiorianus are you realy convineced that ancient Rome was biger than Manhattan and had 1 milion to 2 milion people (maybe 700 000 and than fall to 30 000 .20 000 maybe from 400 000 in end off v century and than failed to 150 000 excluding Vatican to 100 000
The Crusades may never had happened in this timeline. If the Eastern Roman Empire had held onto the Levant there would have been no need. If the Franks/Lombards had never been powerful enough to threaten Italy then they may not have either. Part of the Pope's motivation for the crusades was to get rid of all the Germanic warriors by sending them to fight elsewhere so they wouldn't mess with him in Italy.
Nice video! But the roman senate continue existing in the middle ages in the Rome of the Papal States, also some patrician families who nearly creadted a roman republic
The Muslim invasion would also make a great series of videos, wouldn't they?🤩 there are some fascinating stories and persons involved there, like Khalid ibn Walid AKA the sword of Islam.
The gothic were not one big folk that split up. They wouldn't unify. That could only happen if they would totaly assimilat to the roman folk and they would think that this would be the best solution. If they would assimilat they would have no basis to unify but to rather fight against each other. But it's an interessting thought that east rome maybe could bought the roman/italian senat to maybe start raising troups to support them at their wars by supporting them and to unify italy slowly without war with them. Maybe possible bit saddly not in our timeline.
If a wealthier, more stable Eastern Roman Empire can maintain the Danube frontier in the 6th century CE instead of seeing much of it overrun by the Avars and their Slavic subjects, that could abort the chain of disasters in the 7th century. If you can butterfly away the mutiny of 602 that put Phocas on the throne in Constantinople you get rid of the round of civil wars that followed, the Persian conquest of Egypt and the Asian provinces, and the long and exhausting war to recover those lands. Then Persia and Rome aren't exhausted and vulnerable to the rapid Muslim conquests we saw in the rest of the 7th century, even if Muhammad isn't butterflied away in this timeline. Of course there are lots of branch points based on whatever decisions people make after the Roman-Gothic War is aborted, so this is only one set of possibilities. And if we go with the Connecticut Yankee scenario of the time traveler warning Justinian not to invade, he can also warn of the famine -- you can't prevent the crop failures, but if the empire had been stockpiling grain for years instead of fighting foreign wars you can reduce the famine effects, which in turn reduce the plague effects. It's still a disaster, but a smaller disaster. And a time traveler who warns the empire of those disasters and is proven right would then have huge influence, and could push for reforms and innovations that would only be accepted if a proven Prophet called for them. The Connecticut Yankee stories allow for much wilder divergences in the timeline than the simpler "Justinian zigs instead of zags" stories.
This is one of the biggest what ifs of history. It's obvious that Justinian over extended his resources and that lead to the weaknesses Maurice had to deal with. Sometimes people need a strong, decisive, amoral leader but, to be frank(ish), those very characteristics can make peace impossible as former opponents can never shake hands with the tyrant.
I believe Roman Gothic Empire would have been rename to the Western Roman Empire by the end of the 500s Gothics would have annex Kingdom of the Suebi. By 1000 AD we would have - Western Roman Empire ( Gothic) - Holy Byzantine Empire ( controls land like Macedonian dynasty but with Crimea and Donetsk ) - Abbasid Caliphate ( controls all of north Africa making Vandals move to Western Roman Empire ) - Kingdom of Francia ( weaker version of what the Carolingian Empire but acts more like medieval england ) - Kingdom of Germania ( Germany, Denmark, Czechia, Slovakia, parts of Poland , parts of England ) - Kingdom of Gwynedd ( modern day Wales ) - Kingdom of Britain ( parts of England not control by Germania )
@joea7590 mmm maybe but not as bad since I think Germania might fight off Norse in the main land, but might still claim some lands in northern England and Scotland.
![True Size of a Byzantine Army [c. 900 AD] 3D DOCUMENTARY](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/jE48hMEGlPI/mqdefault.jpg)
![True Size of a Byzantine Army [c. 900 AD] 3D DOCUMENTARY](/img/tr.png)
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
⚔ SPQR Shop, excellent hand-crafted Roman rings and other items:
spqrshop.com?sca_ref=4770010.FM16q4LJHr
Enter the code "Maiorianus" to get a 20% discount on every purchase. The ideal present for any fan of Rome 😉!
Wishful thinking.....
Rome became to fat and greedy... falling on its own weight.. of corruption, slavery and subjugation through neverending wars.
@progresstothestars Byzantine at the time simply refused to acknowledge "Barbaric Kingdoms" as actually Roman. Even if many of them stay loyal to Emperor and continue Roman institutions and speak Latin. It is worth to menton that it was Byzantine who invited Longobards. Most likely with specific intention of preventing rise of West Rome. Unfortunately for them they forget about Franks, who basically continue Roman mandate and later restored Empire. With support of Roman Patriarchy, what become increasingly conflicted with Patriarchy of Constantinople and abandoned to Longobard threat. Ironically in the end title of East Emperor was transferred to Spain (Hapsburgs). Resulting with famous battle of Vienna.
In short. West Rome did not actually fall, because "Barbaric Kings" were actually not as barbaric as Byzantine propaganda claimed. In fact Vandals also were pro-Roman faction and the reason why Latin was preserved in Africa. With Byzantine destroying them, Africa was lost permanently as they could not hold it. And while fall of Ostrogoths end city of Rome, it didn't end Roman population in other territories. As Franks and Visigoths also preserved Latin culture. So there is a continuity between Charlemagne and Late Rome, even if not direct.
And for reminder Byzantine over time become fully Greek.
@progresstothestars Yes, most people not realize that West is literally the West Rome. But I'm not sure what you mean by East in this case? Russia is a and always was a hair of Mongol Empire. I'm not sure who would hold the mantle after all of Austria-Hungary? Maybe Poland?
Unfortunately you must be more specific. East struggle because incompetent and corrupted rulers and constant invasions of the Orde. Not some Western conspiracy.
@progresstothestars Yes, most people not realize that West is literally the West Rome. But I'm not sure what you mean by East in this case? Russia is a and always was a hair of Mongol Empire. I'm not sure who would hold the mantle after all of Austria-Hungary? Maybe Poland?
Unfortunately you must be more specific. East struggle because incompetent and corrupted rulers and constant invasions of the Orde. Not some Western conspiracy.
A Romano-Gothic culture? Nah, the Goths were the warrior minority, the Goths would share the same fate as the Lombards, they’ll mingle and assimilate into Latin culture due to being a minority, also due to Latin’s much stronger prestige and as a way to legitimize ruling over the Romans of Italy.
the lombards get too much shit for what they were, they still significantly changed northern italy and italian clothing looked a lot more germanic after them
@@irgendwer3610 if by significantly changed you mean only leaving a few words into the italian language, clothing, and having an Italian region being named after them, that’s not saying too much to be honest. They were assimilated just like the Visigoths were. It is no coincidence that by the time Italy was last ruled by a Lombard ruler, he had a latin name, Desiderius.
But didn't the same thing happened with Franks?
@@scorpionfiresome3834 that sounds exactly what happened in france, the germanic tribes merged their identity into the local and left an imprint. A romano-gothic culture wouldn't be germanic, it would be latin speaking but with mixed roman and gothic traditions. This is also what happens when tuco-mongols conquer china by the way
@@irgendwer3610 ironically, the south held more longobardic influence over time, since the longobards in the north were crushed by Charlemagne...
02:35
490 AD was still the times of Odoaker who was killed by Theoderich in person in 493.
Justinian fans try not to ignore the devastation he caused to Italy in the name of "Roman Restoration" impossible
I highly doubt Justinian invaded to restore the Roman empire, the east had been invading the west long before the west collapsed for whatever reason they felt like.
Ikr. He not only did that, the bastard literally broke the Eastern Empire's budget and treasury to do it. He didn't give Belisarius enough men first, then sent Narses and John together when he did, while keeping his orders to them vague enough to allow them to challenge Belisarius. North Africa was good because it was taken without as much brutal warfare.
Ahhh, the two extremes of studying Justinian:
- OMG HE WAS THE BEST EMPEROR EVER WHO RESTORED THE WESTERN PROVINCES, BUILT THE HAGIA SOPHIA, GOT THOSE SILK WORMS FROM CHINA, MADE THE PENTARCHY AND JUSTINIAN CODE!
- NOOOOOO HIS WARS RAVAGED ITALY, EMPTIED THE TREASURY, THE PLAGUE OCCURED, ANTIOCH GOT SACKED, AND (checks notes from Procopius) MARRIED A WHORE!
The reasonable position lies between these two extremes. The first half of his reign lay more in line with the former, while the second half was more in line with the latter.
Yeah i feel like the ostrogoths didnt deserve it. His invasion of italy is one of the things i dont like about his reign. Italy would of been so interesting had Justinian not came in and ruined it all. After that, Italy was a shit hole of different people. Saracens, Italians, lombards, franks, papal states, Yuck. The Ostrogoths were the only ones keeping italy unified. After they fell it just sucked.
@@inactivated101 The Ostrogoths were breaking down into wars, their kings after Theodoric were more and more barbaric, and frankly, it is hard to see them staying in charge for long. Justinian's reconquest of Italy would have stuck and Italy would have been reintegrated fully into the empire if not for the Lombards.
If you're stopping the invasion by going back to 534 or 535, you may as well warn Justinian of the coming famine and plague. With even a little preparation time, the Eastern Empire would be able to ride out the natural disasters with fewer casualties and an enhanced reputation. A reputation that can be leveraged into an even more motivated army, ready to launch invasions of Persia and perhaps the Ostrogoths in their moment of weakness in the 540s. An Eastern Empire with both Egypt and Mesopotamia as breadbaskets would be very wealthy and capable of defending against the Muslim invasions. The Zagros mountains as an eastern border would be easy to hold against the forces beyond, while holding a port on the Arabian Gulf could allow easier trade with India.
Also help Belisarius win the battle of Callinicum resulting in a peace in Rome’s favor and invade North Africa Sicily Sardinia and Corsica Dalmatia and the Balearic islands but warn not to invade Italy due to the plague and volcanic winter of 536
There were no muslims in the 500's/6th century tho ?
So your strategy is to keep everyone in an infected city centre? ...he sent out campaigns to save his army from getting wiped out. Genius really.
They lost Egypt to the caliphate.
Also can't do anything about a plague that develops around water in your mediterranean empire.
Warn Nicephorus about the Bulgur ambush if you want a properly repopulated empire with loyal subjects, instead of the fake expanded borders Basil the great gave them.
Personally, I preferred the idea of the Roman Empire did not abandon Britain more because when it is indeed fractured, the domain of Soissons will included the Roman territory on the British Isles as well. So even if the Franks and the Visigoths managed to conquer this de facto independent remnant of the Roman Province of Gaul, escaping across the English Channel will still be an option. And when they did, a chance to revive the Western Roman Empire still be there. Of course, the consolidation of power will be the first priority. And such a task might taken a generation at least. But when it ended, the entirety of what we known as England and Wales will be part of the Roman Province of Britannia, which is a de facto independent Roman province at this point. But as the navy for the campaign to reclaim Gaul is being constructed, the new wave of migration of the Angles, the Saxons and the Jutes to Britain from the Jutland peninsula occurred. So instead of using this navy for the reconquest of Gaul as intended, the situation forced this navy to be used as a defensive barrier against the invasion forces from the Jutland peninsula instead. And of course, some of these newcomers did not arrive as invaders but simply as immigrants who seek for opportunities to find new homes and make money to feed themselves. So there will be some who will definitely be welcomed to Britannia. But in exchange, they have to pledge the allegiance to the Consul of the Western Roman in Londinium as long as they remained on the island. Some of these immigrants may even entered the services within the military while others simply settled down as farmers or craftsmen. At the same time, the Romano-Britannian government may also have to deal with the Picts from the north, thus forcing the Hadrian Walls to be repaired and garrisons to be established at the northern frontier. When the situation becomes stable once again, the reconquest of Gaul is launched at the near end of the 6th century. Most likely when King Childebert II died, resulting in a civil war between his sons. So by taking advantage of this civil war, it will become easier for the Romano-Britannian forces to reclaim Gaul and officially revived the Western Roman Empire. And even if the entirety of Gaul is not reconquered if the two sons of the previous Frankish King decided to joined forces together to confront the invaders, the significant portion of Gaul would have already be taken. And to ensure it will remained that way, a treaty will be drafted between the Western Roman Consul and the Frankish King. In the aftermath of this treaty, the current Consul of the Western Roman Empire is officially proclaimed an Emperor and a regalia is dispatched to Constantinople to confirm the existence of the Western Roman Empire.
Pretty much all that your alternative timeline requires is that agents sympathetic to Riothamus intercept the communications between Arvandus & Euric, king of the Visigoths that urged Euric to stop peace negotiations with the Western Empire and attack their ally, Riothamus, instead.
Sounds like that video by History Rhymes.
Great video. Fun to think about it
@@ari3903 It is based from that too. However, it has my own twists to it such as the need to deal with the migration from the peoples from Jutland first.
I ain’t reading allat
I find one alternate history of the Ostrogoths even more amazing.
Theodoric the Great was an Ostrogoth but he was raised in Constantinople and very much Romanized. He didn't officially proclaim himself a Western Roman Emperor, but he appointed Roman officials(Praefects I think), and ruled pretty much like a Roman emperor.
What if he did proclaim himself a Western Roman Emperor and restored the empire to it's former glory and his dynasty stayed in charge? Sure, these emperors would be Germanic, but they preserved the architecture and institutions of the Romans very well, and in this Gothic Empire, the senate and people of Rome would live on unlike with the Eastern Roman Empire.
Love the content. Cheers from Estonia
There are splendid in-depth series about the Justinianaean reconquest, the Goths and Latin-Germanic culture that I strongly recommend. Hope to see a coop as well
So what are your recommendations or are you referring to this channel?
So where are your recommendations ?
I've always wondered; what would've happened had Theodosius, (the son of Ataulf and Galla Placidia), had survived. You would've had a male ruler who Gothic king with the blood of the Theodosian House in them. Or just Ataulf not dying by assassination and he and Galla having more kids.
Would have made for a very interesting what if. A "Western Rome" ruled by a Gothic King but potentially stylizing himself as a Roman Emperor, (either independent or junior Augustus to the East). Most of the Roman Administrative apparatus working while the state is defended by a Gothic host loyal not to a chieftain in the employ of Rome but loyal to her sovereign.
Thanks!
Thanks! Keep up the good work!
3:55 That kind of Rome would have been fascinating to explore. I'm utterly mesmerized by exploring deserted ruins of once busy places, and that sounds like a dream come true to me!
This was part of the story of "Lest Darkness Fall," wherein a modern archeologist slips through time to this period. The Byzantines still attack, but the story's main character offers his services to the Goths and beats the Easterners. In the epilogue, it is mentioned that the Burgundians and Visigoths are in negotiations for a unified Romano-Gothic state.
I actually wrote an alternate timeline like this when I was a kid. Interesting.
Great content as always. Interesting and thought provoking. How I wish that much more of the glorious city of Rome was with us today!
Great video! One of the most interesting "what if?" in my humble opinion. Thank you your great work and research!
Rome Total War Age of Justinian Mod... Got the Persians out of the way, still invaded North Africa and took out the Vandals. Then I made friendly with the other inland North African tribes and invaded Hispania while making friendly with the Ostrogoths. while I was doing that, the Franks attacked Ostrogothic Italy. Then I was able to be the hero and this time actually march into Italy as a savior. Rome was recaptured without struggle and immediately rebuilt :)
Tha happy ending
Belisarius needed to stop in Africa and intergrade the Goths as the Western Roman empire. Then together, retake the rest of the empire. Thank you for this vid. Its a topic I often contemplated in my head
What if emperor Maurice was not deposed by phocas?
Now this is one I want to see
You definitely would have great relations with Sassanid Perisa, considering Maurice's death was the cause of the 20 year terrible war. Maurice had helped put him on the Sassanid throne. Who knows maybe the 2 Empires become even closer. Yes you're right, that's a video
@@christopherevans2445 Also the fact that Maurice had plans to kind of restore the old system of two emperors, one in the west and one in the east. He wanted to combine the Exarchates of Africa and Ravenna into a reborn Western Roman empire.
@@onemoreminute0543 Yes you are right. And I always felt after the restoration of the west, it really needed a western emperor, or at least a Caesar colleague.
@@christopherevans2445 But wouldn't Khosrau II find another excuse to invade if it wasn't for Maurice's death? In my eyes, even without Phocas, the empire would still lose Syria and Egypt, maybe even sooner without him, due to the fact that the Romans probably wouldn't get an emperor as competent as Heraclius
Don't get me wrong, Phocas was a bad emperor, but the idea that his incompetence was catastrophic to the empire, like Alexios III was, seems to be a little unwarranted
I feel like the crowning of a Romano-Gothic Emperor would only have happened if a schism between east & west still occured. Or by an opportunistic Gothic king in a time of crisis in Byzantium. For example: crowning an emperor in the west while Constantinople was under siege by the Sassanids, Bulgarians, Arabs, etc. And then sending an envoy to the Eastern Emperor demanding recognision as "brother-Emperor in the west" in return for military aid.
I can imagine Genoa and Venice being very different in this Timeline. Maybe even a state like Pisa would have emerged as a dominant commercial power instead.
If you have any interest in a more economic-centric approach, consider this option: Justinian takes the resources he would have spent reconquering Italy and instead digs the Suez Canal 1300 years early (no Canal of the Pharaohs BS, a proper canal for ocean going ships), an entirely feasible engineering project (consider that, in terms of mass moved, it’d be much simpler than building Hadrian’s Wall).
With the tax revenue from increased trade, the Empire is more dominant in the Mediterranean, and easily projects power into the Red Sea. Establishing friendly relations with Axum, the Empire could patrol the sea and keep it free of pirates, especially after it clientalizes the city states of the Hejaz.
With control over the bread baskets of Egypt and North Africa, the Empire could gradually erode the autonomy of the Ostrogoths in Italy.
On the flip side, the increased trade likely means the plague hits harder, but at least the increased trade should also help recovery efforts.
Great episode. I always wondered this. What if Belisarius took the Ostrogothic offer to become ruler and United North Africa and Italy again? With a Roman general back in charge plus control of the grain supply, would love to see a what if episode on that.
One critical difference not mentioned here if the gothic wars had not happened is the Papacy. As we know in our timeline, as a result of the collapse in the secular order in Italy, the Papacy gained political power, prestige, and land around Rome. (For example, who is Pontus Maximus today, and the fake Donations of Constantine?) One reason why Italy was not united until 1870 was that the Papacy did everything possible to prevent it.
A good example of what would happen in this alternative timeline, is in Constantinople (where the secular authority existed until 1452, and even then it was replaced by the Moslem Ottomans) the Orthodox Patriarch never had the same political power as the Pope in Rome.
The Gothic Wars, one of history's decisive epoch changing wars. There aren't many and even fewer battles but they are there for historians to ponder. Well done on illuminating one.
Mairorianus I consider myself a Romaphile. Another great video
The entire reconquista of the old imperial lands was a giant mistake, vast amounts of men, money and time were lost that could have been used to strenghten the empire but instead it only weakened it, now they had bigger borders that now included devastated depopulated land, had a much smaller and exausted by constant warfare millitary + the plague hit. If I remember corectly (probably not) this was the cause of the begining of the end for the eastern empire. EDIT: ok you said that in the video, I commented before watching to the end :P
The reconquista only failed because of a natural disaster. It would have been a massive success otherwise
Good points. Waisting resources on far lands, reminds me of what America is doing instead of making the big cities a safe place to live. (So sad what is happening in San Francisco, CA)
@@cathyf.2672 nah mate, the American empire needs to protect it's interesis in Europe, Middle East and the Pacific, otherwise it will fall HARD. Make no mistake if it is not stopped China will rise and take it's place and it will not be pretty.
Beginning of the end???? Macedonian dynasty would like to speak to you.
"Justinian, give me back my money."
Anastasius I from his grave... probably
Another great video. Also congratulations on 100k subs!
It would have completly changed the history of Italy. It would have meant a stronger gothic Italy being able to resist a longboard invasion (if indeed it would have actually happened) and a less fragmented north without the communes. henceforth without most likely the economic powerhouses of Venice, Milan and Genoa. History would have been very different and most likely Italy would have reached a national identity much earlier.
18:40 the Crusades wouldn't have happened anyway in a scenario where Islam couldn't arise out of a power vacuum from a depleted Byzantine Empire.
Justinian's reckless spending and overreach laid the foundation for crisis to happen in the years preceding the rise of Islam.
History could have played out much, much better than it did. There was so much needless suffering and lost progress because of how this all went down. We may not have gotten the worst possible timeline, but we did not get a good one.
I believe it was Doctor Who that said You Cannot Alter The End, Time Travel does not work this way. The inner fighting between Ostrogoth nobles would led to more severe civil war through out Italian Peninsula. An older, more paranoid Justinian would not trust Belisarius as he would in our timeline, instead sent him equal command to other less capable generals to conquer Italia. War would not be as swift as our timeline, but dragged on and inflicted more suffering.
This isn't the Doctor Who universe. Time travel works whichever way the author can make it plausible. You write one story. Majorianus writes another.
@@hollyingraham3980 I made a point that war, conflict, and sufferings are part of history, most likely a result of human nature and the environment the ones in power, say Ostrogoth nobles, created. The end result of alternate universe comes the same, and it is up to us to embrace this as a part of our own, learn from true history. For example, the biggest what-if in human civilization I think would be the Bronze Age Collapse. With that period, whatever the cause, if damage properly controlled and limited, perhaps we as a civil society would be better off today.
You are so knowledgeable. And interesting my friend.
Thank you!!
Thank you for sharing this very interesting vision!
If the kingdom had lasted, there wouldn't have been the "comuni" era in Italy, and the country may have taken a path more similar to that of France.
Love your content, thanks for sharing
Merry Christmas!
Great work !
The effect of the Gothic War was still seen in Rome today, so if there were no Gothic Wars, then Rome today would not have crumbling pillars and having fallen ones loitering everywhere. The senate building would look different, and ancient monuments repaired.
nice approach
Thank you friend!!!
Merry Christmas and A Happy New Year🎄🎁🥳🌟🎉
I worked on this pod last summer
The Ostrogoths offered Belisarius the crown of the West. If Justinian accepted Belisarius becoming Emperor of the West (Italy, Africa and southern Spain), the West would have recovered under Belisarius' rule. And maybe he would have defeated the Franks and Visigoths and reconquered Gaul and Spain.
What if Belisarius was given a chance, got enough troops to finish the war before the Sassanids attacked, given extra time to finish the war before being transferred to the Sassanid front or even what if the Sassanids never attacked?
Theodorich was an exception of Gothic rulers to value Roman culture. If his successors continued the same politics, Justinian would never atack Italy.
Anyway, for Constantinopolis it would be very inconvenient to have connections with Sardinia without having Sicily, so they would probably have to take it from Goths anyway.
The Ostrogoths were still by and large stanning for Rome post - Theodoric. Amalasuintha was as pro - Justinian as you could get. It was _her_ death that gave Justinian the _casus belli_ to come in and inadvertently wreck the joint.
" If his successors continued the same politics, Justinian would never atack Italy. " They did. Amalasunta received the classical education and was fluent both in Latin and Greek. Theodahad - the last Ostrogothic ruler before the Eastern Roman invasion - as a great admirer of Neoplatonic philosophy was a philosopher-king, not unlike of Marcus Aurelius.
Beware of overstretching your empire. It is one of the most dangerous things.
To achieve the "Romano-Gothic" kingdom of the West, two things would have to happen. A joining of the two royal houses of the Visigoths and Ostrogoths, and the abandonment of Arian Christianity by the Ostrogoths.
I like this video. It’s always fun to think “what if”!
Although this video doesn’t address the Romano-Persian war that occurs in the 7th century that leads to the rise of Islam. Would Hispania and more importantly North Africa be able to withstand the Muslim onslaught?
Can you make again an alternate reality?
Belisarius and the Roman Kingdom (with the will of Justinian), Vitiges and the Ostrogothic Kingdom (with the Catholic faith), Altava and the Berber Kingdom (with Africa and the Islands)?
6:30 - actual video starts 🎉
In short, the Goths would become the new noble families of the Western Half: military generals, governors and senators. The local populace would also participate.
The main issue of both Goths is religious since they were Arians, but I could see them becoming Nicean considering that is what the Franks and Visigoths did anyways. The other issue would be: are the Goths a viceroy of the Eastern Empire, an Equal as the Western Emperor / Rex Romanorum, or an independent entity claiming the title of Roman Emperor?
Depending on the choice, west and east will have some territorial disputes such as North Africa, which was always part of the western half.
Depopulation of Italy would happen anyways, there's no way to stop the plagues and famines of that time, but would be on a lesser quantity considering there would be no war.
Since the Ostrogoths followed the arian 'heresy', that would have caused another important feature of this alternate world.
Dude, it is heresy. They deny the divinity of Christ.
Not true. They acknowledged the divinity of christ but stated it was not the same level as God the father. Instead of being of the SAME substance, they were of SIMILAR substance, the difference in the words in Greek is the letter 'i' - called iota in Greek. We get the phrase, 'couldn't care a jot' from this peculiarity. regardless, the Ostrogoths were arians, not athanasians. And frankly, the Arians were far more logical that the incredible mental gymnastics it took to explain the current version of the holy trinity. Mind you, personally, the whole concept of God and divinity is both massively illogical, scientifically impossible and utterly irrelevant in learning how to lead a good life. Like all Christians, I disbelieve in all other gods - the only difference being I believe in the existence of one less god than christians. hope you aren't an American evangelical. If so, I apologize in advance if my personal attitudes offend your beliefs. @@daguroswaldson257
Would be pretty cool
This is the ultimate timeline.
I can already imagine in that alternate timeline Justinian would launch a conquest against the Sassanid Empire and its allies on the east with the backing of the Ostrogothic Kingdom who would provide Justinian an army of hardy gothic soldiers to serve as the elite army of the Eastern Roman Empire whose strength would be similar that to the Varangian Guard of Emperor Basil II.
ERE should've consolidated their reconquests in Africa. They surrounded the Italian Peninsula which could've pressured the Ostrogoths to vassalage or negotiations. There's no way that the Ostrogoths were going to win over the still cohesive and empire-loyal Italian roman society. Heck, a simple grain dole or sponsorship from the ERE would seal the loyalty of Rome/Italy to Constantinople.
That was deffinetly the longest intro you ever had on your channel :D
Your map of a union of the Visigoth and Ostrogoth differs only towards the end of the novel Less Darkness Fall the Burgundians is part of that state due to a revolt engineered by the Ostrogoths.
It's entirely possible that the Roman-Sasanian wars would not have resumed, leading to the Rashidun Caliphate being unable to conquer Persia and much of Rome (the Caliphate's conquests, after all, were preceded by the Roman-Sasanian War of 602-628).
yep this is what i believe that truly set rome down to destruction, the gothic wars.
Yeah,.The huns didn't help,.and an explosion of germanic Tribes even more than in the past,..It was alott to handle~
Sad Alan/Vandal noises .....
Love how the city would have looked like
A stronger Eastern Rome probably puts up a much stiffer fight against the Arab invasions. In turn, the Ostrogoths confederate a weakened (but not destroyed) Visigoth state to re-form Western Rome. By the 740-750s, the Western Romans take advantage of the Berber Revolt/civil war inside the Caliphate to retake Carthage and most of North Africa.
Well the Arab expansion will not happen if the last Roman Sassanid war doesn't occur. North Africa would remain latin
At the time of the Arab invasions, ERE was as powerful as any other empire, it is a common misconception that it was weaker and the Arabs took advantage of it. Let's not forget, in every battle that the Romans faced the Arabs, they had twice the men. I don't want to give credit to the Arabs but it was impressive how they destroyed the Sassanids and ate the Romans.
Amazing Rome
Unfortunately, as the Quantum physicists say, "Unperformed experiments produce no results." All we can do is study what in fact happened, and try to prevent a new version of it from happening again!
Justnian had right idea... What in hell he expected Belisarius to do with 8000 men was another matter.
Belisarius quickly winning Italy as he had Africa, and then smashing the Franks, was by no means unlikely, if given a decentbsized army. Justinian had a general worthy of Scipio, yet gave him a glorified bodyguard and some mercenaries to fight.
Failing that, it would have been interesting if Belisarius had accepted the western crown at Ravenna, and led a Romano-Gothic army to smash the Franks and Burgundians, and possibly the Visigoths and Lombards.
Perhaps with Italy more unified and stronger, the Franks would have expanded only in the dirrection of germany/the north. The Frankish way of war would still exist and be powerful, and the Frankish desire for expansion and christianisation would also still exist, but with a stronger italy they would only expand north and east (and possibly even into britain). Perhaps Northern France might be more germanised or even fully germanic as this alternate frankish empire is more dominated by Germans even when it splits up between sons.
And now I am getting a better understanding of why western romans developed a sense of anger and disgust towards the Byzantines. These latter were constantly trying to sabotage any sort of political challenge to them in west. And they cry because our ancestors sacked Constantinople after all the bullshit they did. I cannot imagine just how irresponsible a part of the Roman elite was to just move the imperial center to the hellenistic east, give up territories to non roman populations, and continually invade and destroy western latin speaking regions. Now I see why non Greek speaking eastern romans opted for rule under Caliphs than under "Basilei".
This is why I like HRE more than ERE. ERE did more damage to Italy and the city of Rome than any barbarian invasion ever had. At least the HRE tried to restore Rome in its early days before it became dysfunctional.
Without the ERE then WRE would have likely been restored or at least italy would have remained a whole nation with an intact roman culture + institutions.
I too, am an admirer of the HRE and i heavely support your opinion.
Could you do a what if the son of Ataulf and Galla Placidia, Theodosius, survived and became Emperor? Would the WRE have become a Romano-Gothic Empire?
Justinian was right to take North Africa - easy conquest and easy to keep and defend. The East should have then been his focus that is how he places his empire on firm foundation. And then later Emperors can play around with Western expansion.
Just a thought, maybe a Romano-Gothic Empire would have marriage relationships with the East.
What would have happened with the lombards ??
Most of the tribal leaders in the West admired Rome. So Justinian probably could have achieved a lot through alliance making and diplomacy.
I think, sooner or later, there would be conflict over North Africa. But if the Western Roman Empire survives, or if it falls to someone besides Iustinianus, I think Theodoricus's policy of religious toleration would survive.
What do you think the odds are if they said surrender, you're not a king anymore, you're a governor now. Or else, war. Would they have gone for it? The Goths I mean.
This is why I don't consider Justinian "great" he got too power hungry and his Italian campaign led to so much unnecessary destruction while severely sapping the empire of it's wealth, the African campaign made so much more sense.
Justinian, for all his wisdom and learning, forgot that Rome _wasn't_ built in a day, let alone a lifetime.
I'll pick option 3 since it's the most realistic of the 3.
Why are alternate timelines always a bit cooler than the timeline we ended up with?
As a Swede and as such a ancestor of the cousins of the great Goths I am to some extent deeply offended by the fact that 1500 years later there are still a racist misunderstanding about their role in world history. Justinian I destroyed the stable government ushered in by the great liberator Odoacer! The Roman Empire was two failed states! And Justinian’s Empire is proof of that
I would like to see a united visigothic - ostrogothic kingdom, converted to catholicism, surviving to the 21 century.
Goths were an admixture of germanics, slavs, sarmatians and huns
Source? There is none. You just made shit up. Goths werre an eastern germanic people and spoke a gothic language, nothing to do with slavs
I think that Frankish king Theodebert I will invade Italy, taking advantage of a civil war (inevitable among the Goths).
There are a lot of unkowns in this story. The Ostrogothic kingdom would have been still under attack and would have fallen sooner or later. Everyone wanted to have Rome. The Franks, the Germans, the Muslims, the Byzanthine... maybe if it was a slow bleeding instead of a collapse, the city might have fared better. Still, even a united Latino-Gothic empire might have lacked the resources and manpower to last for a long time.
Rome was always a prize to be won, no matter how run down and ruined it might become. Everybody would have kept attacking.
The volcanic eruption of 536 and Justianian's plague are the kind of events that one might call them "sheer bad luck". If these events had not happened, I would say that the empire would have had a very good chance of stabilizing the fronts and revitilizing Italy's devastated economy. speaking about human decisions- derived events, I think that had Phocas never risen to power, the empire would be in considerably better shape and might have secured its possesions in Egypt and the Levant from the Persians and the Arabs.
Great video man! However I find the opening to be a bit draged out and could be a video on it's own. Describing the city of rome from it's inception and skip 100 ish years each time and see how it changes. As first minutes doesn't have much with the rest of the video to do.
Do you really think the British would have been driven completely out of Gaul by 600? It seems a bit unlikely when you consider how long their descendants stayed there in reality.
Sebastian Maiorianus are you realy convineced that ancient Rome was biger than Manhattan and had 1 milion to 2 milion people (maybe 700 000 and than fall to 30 000 .20 000 maybe from 400 000 in end off v century and than failed to 150 000 excluding Vatican to 100 000
The Crusades may never had happened in this timeline. If the Eastern Roman Empire had held onto the Levant there would have been no need. If the Franks/Lombards had never been powerful enough to threaten Italy then they may not have either. Part of the Pope's motivation for the crusades was to get rid of all the Germanic warriors by sending them to fight elsewhere so they wouldn't mess with him in Italy.
Nice video! But the roman senate continue existing in the middle ages in the Rome of the Papal States, also some patrician families who nearly creadted a roman republic
The Muslim invasion would also make a great series of videos, wouldn't they?🤩 there are some fascinating stories and persons involved there, like Khalid ibn Walid AKA the sword of Islam.
The gothic were not one big folk that split up. They wouldn't unify. That could only happen if they would totaly assimilat to the roman folk and they would think that this would be the best solution. If they would assimilat they would have no basis to unify but to rather fight against each other. But it's an interessting thought that east rome maybe could bought the roman/italian senat to maybe start raising troups to support them at their wars by supporting them and to unify italy slowly without war with them. Maybe possible bit saddly not in our timeline.
Would we still have pizza in this time line?
You're asking what needed to be asked.
If a wealthier, more stable Eastern Roman Empire can maintain the Danube frontier in the 6th century CE instead of seeing much of it overrun by the Avars and their Slavic subjects, that could abort the chain of disasters in the 7th century. If you can butterfly away the mutiny of 602 that put Phocas on the throne in Constantinople you get rid of the round of civil wars that followed, the Persian conquest of Egypt and the Asian provinces, and the long and exhausting war to recover those lands. Then Persia and Rome aren't exhausted and vulnerable to the rapid Muslim conquests we saw in the rest of the 7th century, even if Muhammad isn't butterflied away in this timeline.
Of course there are lots of branch points based on whatever decisions people make after the Roman-Gothic War is aborted, so this is only one set of possibilities.
And if we go with the Connecticut Yankee scenario of the time traveler warning Justinian not to invade, he can also warn of the famine -- you can't prevent the crop failures, but if the empire had been stockpiling grain for years instead of fighting foreign wars you can reduce the famine effects, which in turn reduce the plague effects. It's still a disaster, but a smaller disaster. And a time traveler who warns the empire of those disasters and is proven right would then have huge influence, and could push for reforms and innovations that would only be accepted if a proven Prophet called for them. The Connecticut Yankee stories allow for much wilder divergences in the timeline than the simpler "Justinian zigs instead of zags" stories.
I think a more fun scenario would be what if the plague of Justinian never hit, or wasn't as bad as irl.
You'd never see Islam rise to prominence.
This is one of the biggest what ifs of history. It's obvious that Justinian over extended his resources and that lead to the weaknesses Maurice had to deal with. Sometimes people need a strong, decisive, amoral leader but, to be frank(ish), those very characteristics can make peace impossible as former opponents can never shake hands with the tyrant.
I believe Roman Gothic Empire would have been rename to the Western Roman Empire by the end of the 500s
Gothics would have annex Kingdom of the Suebi.
By 1000 AD we would have
- Western Roman Empire ( Gothic)
- Holy Byzantine Empire ( controls land like Macedonian dynasty but with Crimea and Donetsk )
- Abbasid Caliphate ( controls all of north Africa making Vandals move to Western Roman Empire )
- Kingdom of Francia ( weaker version of what the Carolingian Empire but acts more like medieval england )
- Kingdom of Germania ( Germany, Denmark, Czechia, Slovakia, parts of Poland , parts of England )
- Kingdom of Gwynedd ( modern day Wales )
- Kingdom of Britain ( parts of England not control by Germania )
Would the norman invasions still happen in this timeline?
@joea7590 mmm maybe but not as bad since I think Germania might fight off Norse in the main land, but might still claim some lands in northern England and Scotland.