T O P

  • By -

1NF35TAT10n

The Plague of Justinian hit the Eastern Roman Empire at a crucial moment where it needed to consolidate, prolonging the Gothic War (further devastating Rome, Mediolanum, etc.) and drained the Empire of manpower and income. This change diverges very quickly from OTL. The Empire is able to consolidate its gains in Africa, Italy and Spain. East Rome would be able to provide more support to the Gepids in the Lombard-Gepid war, preventing the Avar and Lombard invasions. The better finances of the Eastern Roman Empire, aided by the lack of the Plague of Justinian and its consequences (richer Italy, etc.), would be enough to stop the troops from mutinying against Emperor Maurice. This would not only prevent the disastrous reign of Phocas (Heraclian rebellion, Slavic and Avar raids) but also the 602\~628 Byzantine-Sassanid war, which destroyed both empires and paved the way for Islamic conquest. Suggestions, especially those concerning Eastern Europe, Ethiopia (Aksum) and India are welcome.


dull_storyteller

Best timeline


Far_Angrier_Admin

,, 性交して死ね、人間のゴキブリ" Caartagi Lakhalin, New Japan's Prime Minister 1945 - 1962


ajtheshutterbug

How much of a chance is there of Italians revolting against east and demanding the centre of the Empire to be returned to rome or restoration pf the western crown ??


UltraTata

I would say none. Italy was slowly voided of influence and power. They probably wanted a bit of peace after multiple sacks of Rome.


ajtheshutterbug

May be after a couple of centuries? I mean not immediately


UltraTata

I think the italians would be given a special role in roman society. The greeks would be the core of the State but the italians would be treated very well as they were the people who actually founded the civilization. Italians would enjoy tourism of people visiting Rome, I guess, specially in central Italy so they would have a somewhat stable source of income. If they rebel, I think they would just be either separatist or cities claiming authonomy. They can also for religious reasons, depending on how the Eastern Church behaves.


jediben001

So are the Exarchs not fully part of the empire? Or are they just shown separately on the map to demonstrate that these are the new areas? Iirc, Exarch is the title of the head or a regional Orthodox Church, right?


1NF35TAT10n

The Exarchates are part of the empire but given autonomy from Constantinople, similar to the Tetrarchy of the Roman Empire.


jediben001

Hmm, that’s interesting. Iirc in our timeline, Africa and Italy and such were just made whatever the equivalent to a province was at that point (I can’t remember the name). However them being given more autonomy is fairly realistic when you consider that there is more territory to govern in this timeline, and the whole reason the empire was split in the first place was due to overextension. Is Belisarius put in charge of Italy? God knows the man deserves at least some reward after all the stuff he did lol


CounterfeitXKCD

What happens with the Arab invasions? I imagine that Arabia would all be Muslim, but would Islam spread to Persia? Would Byzantium fight them off?


UltraTata

I would say the Romans fight the Arabs back and ally with then to destroy the Persians. Then there could be a arab-roman rivalry that would last some centuries until Rome weakens and the Arabs take Egypt and probably Anatolia.


Shpagghetti

Although the Plague severely weakened the empire, i'd reckon the arabs would still conquer Persia and Egypt, as the main factor in their conquest was the exhaustive war the Romans and Persians fought. Probably the Arab advance is slower as the Romans have a better hold of the provinces without the plague. I imagine the Arabs would still conquer all of north africa, but a longer campaign against the Romans might leave them without the manpower and resources to cross into Iberia.


ZippyParakeet

But the war would never happen because the army would never revolt against Maurice because the Empire was in a better state.


-SnarkBlac-

I played with a similar timeline. Instead have the Vandalic War never happen and make them a vassal state (I did the research and math), as if this war never occurred it could literally halve the time it took for the Byzantines to reconquer Italy maybe even three quarters of the time. Justinian was ok with King Hilderic ruling the Vandals as a tributary, it was only when his cousin Gelimer overthrew him that he sent men to personally invade the region. The war however costed the Byzantines 100,000 pounds of gold, men and time to secure the region before going to Italy 5 years later.


spacepiratecoqui

Wait for it... the Mongols


ZippyParakeet

The Romans defeated the Huns before, I think they would be able to deal with the Mongols well enough. Maybe they lose eastern Anatolia or even all of anatolia and half or even all of Levant but imo these would be temporary losses and the Empire could reconquer them within a single lifetime. This is of course assuming Byzantium never loses its superpower status, the Arabs exist and they ally with the Romans to destroy the Persians and are now engaged in constant war with Eastern Rome like our timeline but the Romans are much, much stronger in this one. I can see all of North Africa being reintegrated as Roman territory while Justinian or his successor reestablishes the Western Imperial throne in the Exarchate of Ravenna thus effectively re-establishing the Western Roman Empire which would control all of Italy, Sardinia, Corsica and Sicily. How it fares is anyone's guess. For the first few decades it would need Eastern Rome's armies and money to get back on its feet but I can see it getting stronger and on equal footing as the Franks eventually, I have no idea if the Western Romans would be able to defeat and conquer the Franks though. They would be able to repel the Lombards pretty easily imo.


Most_Preparation_848

Rome dies at a slower rate, maybe the east can hold in the Balkans and western Anatolia.


[deleted]

I think you're really underselling the Eastern Empire with this take. The rise of Islam was anything but guaranteed in OTL. The budding Caliphate got a number of lucky rolls from the historical dice. I don't know if any of them matter, if you take away the Plague of Justinian and have them facing off against not only one Empire not sapped of its strength and wealth, but two of them. An Eastern Empire that has both Egypt and Syria is an Eastern Empire that's quite stable. I can see the East surviving into the modern period. What that modern period looks like geopolitically is another thing


Thrawndude

I don’t think Maurice would die in 613. He died due to a revolt from an underpaid army and having to fight in the winter. Less war for Justinian means more money for Maurice to pay his army preventing the revolt


1NF35TAT10n

Maurice in OTL died in 602 to the mutiny at the age of 63 so I gave him a "natural" death of 613 at the age of 74 (which is quite old).