Alternate History Thread V

Assuming you mean the coastal one, yes. West Africa isn't actually finished, there are a lot more slave trading colonies along the coast.

/Thlayli went ahead and posted the incomplete version of the map I had sent him without telling me. :p

EDIT: And as to the new cities, I really think the prosperity and population of the American colonies is vastly exaggerated right now.
 
Could I have Bohemia or Florence, please, Bohemia if it isn't too pathetically weak, but Florence if it is?
 
Assuming said states survive the BT, and no one else asks for those states, maybe! Please ground yourself in appropriate period/cultural knowledge.

Well, Avalon has been explored and colonized for almost 300 years, which would theoretically put them at a mid 18th century level of development, but that should naturally be adjusted backwards a little, so I'm going to estimate an approximately 1650-1700 level of OTL development in terms of population.
 
Yes it was totally the English that kept the Irish from being a major colonising power - without that they can leverage the vast resources of Ireland*, its strategic position**, and the boundless fecundity*** and unity**** of its people.

*None
You're dry wit is disarmingly hilarious. I too enjoy creating humorous juxtapositions by saying things that are empirically false with the understanding the audience will pick up upon the falsehood and join me in a laugh about how ridiculous such a statement would be if I had meant it. To explain the joke to others, he is saying none because Ireland has large deposits of iron, silver, gold and lead as well as a history of metalwork and trade of its huge deposits of copper and zinc (Eire, of course, containing the most Zinc in all of Europe) which when combined together make brass. The joke gains more heft because, as we all know, resources are more than just minerals. Ireland has huge amounts of Peat, which is one of the most important fuel sources during the time, used to heat homes, smelt iron into incredibly strong weapons and armor and also as a good fertilizer. Speaking of fertilizer, Ireland is an incredibly fertile land that can support enough grain, oats and livestock to feed one and a half countries. Of course, if two countries are involved you need to let half of one starve and succumb to disease, but maybe we could avoid that type of genocide in this timeline? Or we could feed them fish, as Ireland controls some of the best fishing grounds in all of Europe, right in its territorial waters.

Once you understand the context, the joke really is quite funny.

**Also none, except for attacking England, its in a bad place to trade with Europe (especially for the Baltic supplies that are crucial) and off the major currents for going to the Americas.
I am actually legitimately confused about this one. Even pre-Norse, Ireland had extensive trade with Baltic peoples. Their reach even extended to the Near East. Ireland has been recognized as a strategic position for trade (as well as control of England) since Tacitus...

***Pretty much absent pre introduction of the Potato
Economic historians are in pretty unanimous agreement that while the introdction of the potato did accelerate trends in population growth, it was not the main cause of it. Rather, the potato allowed the British to create an extreme lower class of "potato people" who could survive on the crop while exporting everything else they produced. The lack of an alternative crop to turn to (since the landlords were selling away the agricultural abundance) was the cause of the extreme mortality of the Great Famine. In non-colonized society, a healthy diet non-stratified by race would theoretically allow similar rates of reproduction, unless you are arguing that the potato made the natives more fertile, in which case I'm going to go make millions hawking French Fries in front of In vitro clinics.

****Also absent, and likely to remain that way due to geography and the balanced situation of the Kingdoms.
This is about the Heptarchy right?
 
Oh for the love of. Look, someone of British heritage disparaging Ireland and someone of Irish heritage extolling it! What a surprise!

Can we please keep this discussion out of here? Take it to WWW.

I do believe that nothing in there was extolling. Excoriating, but not extolling. And its not an ethnicity thing - I think that the modern British people are very nice and extremely funny, if a bit open to CCTV recording for my tastes. My rather inflated quibble was with the characterization that the timeline was absurd or impossible because of Eire's (non-existent-in-the-areas-asserted) deficiencies. That definitely belongs here, in the Alt History thread, where we discuss alt history and things that could have happened in alternative histories...
 
Do you really need great fertility or large amounts of resources to found colonies? I'd say not. In fact, a lack of fertility is more likely to drive people into emigrating. If I remember correctly (which I may not), the Potato famine actually caused large-scale emigration to the USA.

A lack of food does not drive down reproductiveness, and it is surplus population that founds colonies. Another example of this is many of the colonies of the Greeks in ancient times.
 
You're dry wit is disarmingly hilarious. I too enjoy creating humorous juxtapositions by saying things that are empirically false with the understanding the audience will pick up upon the falsehood and join me in a laugh about how ridiculous such a statement would be if I had meant it. To explain the joke to others, he is saying none because Ireland has large deposits of iron, silver, gold and lead as well as a history of metalwork and trade of its huge deposits of copper and zinc (Eire, of course, containing the most Zinc in all of Europe) which when combined together make brass. The joke gains more heft because, as we all know, resources are more than just minerals. Ireland has huge amounts of Peat, which is one of the most important fuel sources during the time, used to heat homes, smelt iron into incredibly strong weapons and armor and also as a good fertilizer. Speaking of fertilizer, Ireland is an incredibly fertile land that can support enough grain, oats and livestock to feed one and a half countries. Of course, if two countries are involved you need to let half of one starve and succumb to disease, but maybe we could avoid that type of genocide in this timeline? Or we could feed them fish, as Ireland controls some of the best fishing grounds in all of Europe, right in its territorial waters.

Ireland is Europes largest producer of zinc yes, the fact however that these deposits are deep mines discovered in the 20th century makes their utility here precisely nill. Describing the deposits of iron, silver and gold as large is an amusing counter joke, although I'll grant you the copper. Lots of places have peat, and its not useful for smelting as it doesn't get hot enough - perhaps you're confusing it with bog iron. Incredably fertile? Producing a food surplus in the 17th century in on isn't t

I am actually legitimately confused about this one. Even pre-Norse, Ireland had extensive trade with Baltic peoples. Their reach even extended to the Near East. Ireland has been recognized as a strategic position for trade (as well as control of England) since Tacitus...

Trading with those places is not the same as being a good place for trade, Irleand can very easily be cut off by other nations and choke points, and can't generate wealth by transhipment since its on the edge of the trade network rather than a hub. Tacitus only said it was important for controlling Britain, something I agreed with in my post, but due to the relative populations and resources its only relevent for when Ireland is being used by another power like Rome or France.

Economic historians are in pretty unanimous agreement that while the introdction of the potato did accelerate trends in population growth, it was not the main cause of it. Rather, the potato allowed the British to create an extreme lower class of "potato people" who could survive on the crop while exporting everything else they produced. The lack of an alternative crop to turn to (since the landlords were selling away the agricultural abundance) was the cause of the extreme mortality of the Great Famine. In non-colonized society, a healthy diet non-stratified by race would theoretically allow similar rates of reproduction, unless you are arguing that the potato made the natives more fertile, in which case I'm going to go make millions hawking French Fries in front of In vitro clinics.

Oh yes the eeeevil British, also irrelevent for my points regarding earlier Irish power as seen in the TL and irrelevent to your own points attempting to refute it! Ireland still had rather less than a million people in the 15th century - less than Denmark. Also going on about race when it was enormously more a class issue only shows your ignorance. Get off your high plastic horse.

This is about the Heptarchy right?

The Heptarchy wasn't stable - the easy internal movement and the much greater populations of the Severn-Thames southern region would more likely than not see a unified polity emerging (though stuff like wales and northumbria could quite plausibly left out), much like on the plains of northern India or China. Ireland on the other hand does not have such an easy time unifying due to the more balanced nature of the kingdoms and the geographic barriers.

For the record I'm not disparaging Ireland - merely trying to tell its capabilites accurately and calling out the fellation of it you see all to often in Alternative History scenarios. Ireland could have unified and done impressive things, but the Irish colossus bestriding the globe if it wasn't for the English keeping them down is silly, as much as it might move the juices in certain peoples organs. Of course some of the problem here is the moronic rates of colonisation you see in NESing and NES-related scenarios.
 
Yes, well, despite said arguments, there's nothing in history saying that a small nation can't be a peripheral player in continental politics in the early modern period and still have a concurrent period of colonial hegemony, like Portugal for example.

So, I'm not making the argument that the current incarnation of the alt-Irish are all that powerful, but I'm definitely saying that if they were left alone for long enough, the Irish could conceivably exist in their current incarnation with a veneer of historical realism.

Also, you played Genoa, so you're really one to talk. :p Noooow, can we pleeeease table this discussion? I'm going to be posting some TL stuff soon. Ish.
 
Thlayli said:
Yes, well, despite said arguments, there's nothing in history saying that a small nation can't be a peripheral player in continental politics in the early modern period and still have a concurrent period of colonial hegemony, like Portugal for example.

... Portugal is precisely why it doesn't work. The whole Portuguese empire was held together with hope, prayer and very cheap bubblegum, the kind that gets hard after a few chomps. The empire, if you can call it that, was a bunch of fortified outposts eking out an existence in constant fear of the locals. It never made any money, never achieved its goals and is so vastly inferior to later Dutch efforts that its a wonder why anyone remembers it or cares about it. Furthermore, if mods bothered to properly model early European colonial efforts properly most of what the players do would cause them to miserably fail. W/E.
 
@Thlayli Please refrain from using land borders the thickness of Groucho Marx's eyebrows and moustache combined, Dr Hackenbush.

Now, you asked for it... Masada's quick survey of Southeast Asia.

Ayutthaya

Malay Peninsula and Aceh

This is egregious. In OTL it was hard enough for Ayutthaya to control the Malay Peninsula even with monarchs of a very high calibre. Anything short of that and the whole enterprise started to look shabby. And I'm using control in a generous sense since Ayutthayan policy towards the Peninsula was to accept nominal suzerainty, extort some tribute and occasionally invade when it couldn't get its way. Even with its preponderance of strength on the land it more often than not got rebuffed. Malacca, for one, had an unusually good record of beating it. On the sea it got routinely annihilated by inferior forces.

Sometimes it managed to secure a measure of loyalty by balancing against Malacca or whatever other tawdry power wanted to try actually try to impose its will. Usually, this forced it to fight war after war just to maintain its position of nominal hegemony. For extra amusement it seems to have routinely come to the aid of its vassals when they started and then lost wars against neighbours. It was a convenient legal fiction for most of the Malay states and wasn't taken to seriously by anyone. You tendered tribute, allowed passage and used the whole arrangement to your own advantage.

Therefore, the notion that it could both control the Peninsula in its entirety and Aceh is correspondingly laughable. If it couldn't do the first at its OTL height, then there's no hope it could do the second. It might be able to exercise some measure of improved control over the Malay Peninsula compared to OTL by garrisoning and careful selection of vassals. But it would still need to keep a light very deft hand to keep it working. It should be explicitly acknowledged that the region is a bunch of vassal states with special care correspondingly taken to spell out exactly what that entails in terms of obligations to Ayutthaya. As to Aceh, I have absolutely no idea how that could be realistically held for any period of time. You could potentially have sacked Aceh proper and established a loose hold over surviving coastal cities but its unlikely in the extreme that you could manage to do anything else. The propensity towards rebellion would be extreme and the likelihood of having it coincide with another rebellion closer to home is inevitable. Not to mention, it takes a significant period of time to wander down the Malay Peninsula with an army and thence to sail over the straits to Sumatra.

Mainland holdings

This is less egregious. But I still find it hard to believe that Ayutthaya has managed to keep together to such an extent. By rights it should be falling apart every time the hand at the tiller loosens. Over the course of fifty years, it should have had an inordinate number of rebellions, civil wars and disloyal vassals. This is even without the inclusion of all kinds of fun minorities thrown into the pot like it has now. Khmer revivalism should never be put down, neither should the Mon and Shan and all the sundry other groups nipping at the heels. It only takes a bad monarch to bring the whole edifice down to at least its core territories. Personally, this should be treated in much the same way as the Malay Peninsula and Aceh. A bunch of vassals states under Thai princes or intendants (in the French colonial sense) which are to small to revolt successfully against the central government and to dependant upon its support to ensure they don't get lynched in the palace by the locals.

I don't believe this would be successful in stopping all revolts and I would expect to see revolts by princes or intendants who have gone 'native' and managed to pull together a large enough grouping of locals to pose a serious threat. This is really only likely to occur in the context of a pre-existent civil war (of which, there should be at least 2) with both sides calling on this new force to assist it. Presumably, if the rebel picks the right side he might get his new holdings legitimised forming a kingdom inside the empire. Its entirely possible to see a Khmer kingdom forming under the aegis of a Thai prince, with a Thai military aristocracy and indigenous Khmer aristocracy swimming above a population of primarily Khmer with Chams and all sorts thrown into the mix. Conceivably something like this could happen in the Malay Peninsula.

Economically:

Well, the Malay Peninsula would never have attained its OTL economic prosperity. Malacca was taken pretty early on in its career which goes some way to explaining the relative strength of Aceh. Keeping this in mind and the ease of simply relocating trade emporia I'm willing to venture that with the subjugation of Malacca and the invasion of Aceh trade would simply have rerouted back towards southern Sumatra. If the arrangement with Aceh is loose then its entirely probable that the trade would have instead rerouted somewhere nearer but still distant from Ayutthaya interference.

I'm not entirely sure what the hell is happening in terms of Indian Ocean trade, I presume, Kandy has measure of influence on it, which might be the rationale for a retardation of Islamic expansion (and if that is the case, what then happened to the Gurajati merchants?) which kinda leaves hanging why Aceh ever shot to prominence in the first place. Ports on the south of the Sumatran coast would have made considerably more sense as Aceh is only favoured in a particular context mostly related to its religious status and the fall of Malacca to the Portuguese. It also makes more sense in terms of a renewed Chinese interest in South East Asia...

Melayu:

I'm still confused as to what the hell this is precisely. I originally thought it was a Javanese kingdom in the mould of Majapahit. Instead I found out its a weird pseudo-Srivijaya with a base in Sumatra and a capital in Sumatra. I'm not sure how the hell it works, let alone why it exists this way and not in the way I first thought but whatever. At a guess, as the somewhat inadequate time-line suggests it was a successor to Srivijaya that was given a substantial boost by the early demise of Malacca and the renewal of Chinese interest in the region. Somehow, it got a hold in Java and proceeded to overrun the place. I guess it claimed the mantle of Srivijaya and in doing so legitimised a take-over of the old Saliendra patrimony. In that case I'm not sure how Malacca was founded considering that it was founded by a Prince of Srivijaya-Melayu fleeing from Singhasari. But I'll work with it.

Sumatra

I'm not sure why its shown ruling the interior not only is it worthless, its difficult to control. The inclusion of pseudo-Bari and the weird presence of the economic centre to the south of that is unusual. The former was usually beyond the reach of everyone and maintained its own amicable independence for a long time. The Meningkabau should probably not be under anyone's control... otherwise I can't make any particular objections on the basis of the map alone. I should not that central control over the cities outside of the capital pseudo-Palembang is unlikely.

Java

I don't even want to know how it was taken or why Kediri wasn't burned to the ground and the population settled elsewhere. That's pretty standard operating procedure. Whatever. I don't find it unlikely that the island could be controlled but it would probably go something like this. The west and central highlands would be under royal control while the east which is notoriously difficult to hold would be divided between a number of vassals. The coastal cities would be carefully separated from the kingdoms to dilute power further. These might have a ruling council of merchants or alternatively they might be put under the control of royal princes. Either way, they would be given considerable leeway to act as a counter-balance to Javanese revivalist ambitions.

I suspect, that the Sundanese would form an integral part of the apparatus of state. Certainly, it seems that they would make up the largest group under royal control in this system and I guess we could explain away some of the incongruities in the set-up by having the monarchy closely aligned with them. It helps that they straddle both main islands. I suppose a similar relationship might have sprung up between the monarch and the Madurese as well. Both would be fairly loyal to the monarchy and both would form a nifty counter-balance to the Javanese in addition to the more generically Malay cities on the coast.

Outer-Islands

These are probably just loose vassals, feeding raw materials into the broader Melayu trade system. Mutually advantageous trade for both parties would militate against either party acting up. Should be relatively stable in the absence of viable competition.

Economically

Far and above the richest state in the region outside of China. It would have a strong agrarian economy based in Java with an absurd amount of wealth pouring into it from its trade from everywhere else... I don't think the Ayutthayan control over the strait would pose much of a threat. Its simply to hard to police until the advent of steam and OTL experience would seem to dictate that its fleet would be vastly superior to its neighbours.

China

I don't understand why the Chinese would want the Phillipines. Its not particularity useful for them and nor would it be all that easy to conquer. The whole notion that Mindinao would be Muslim is kinda ******** if you've already gimped Islam. It should be a net drain on the Chinese economy and generate rebellions on a semi-regular basis. At least you killed the Chinese hold on Singapore and Borneo. Seriously, Singapore is lovvingly awful until the advent of steam power. Get over it, people. There's a good reason why it never developed into a major city before the British got there. I honestly think Annam and Champa should both have revolted at some stage. Its a difficult proposition to keep both down. W/E.
 
So, I'm not making the argument that the current incarnation of the alt-Irish are all that powerful, but I'm definitely saying that if they were left alone for long enough, the Irish could conceivably exist in their current incarnation with a veneer of historical realism.

I contend that assertion.

Also, you played Genoa, so you're really one to talk. :p Noooow, can we pleeeease table this discussion? I'm going to be posting some TL stuff soon.

Genoa had more cash, more people (inc Corsica, Sardinia, and contacts in the area), and trade/plantation empires are very different from settlement empires. Also what I was allowed to do was pretty stupid as well ;).
 
Well, you can contend until the cows come home. The split with Rome in the 11th century began a stronger tradition of self-organization in the Irish psyche, along with all the traditional medieval governmental benefits of a close church-state bond, and despite their low population no one has seriously attempted to conquer them. The royal will and religious desire to colonize was extant, and the navigational route was a retracing of the Vikings' steps. Regardless, their current colonial domains are an amalgamation of Irish and Breton efforts.

(I am scaling back the level of European colonial development in the Americas, though.)

Anyhow, thanks for that, Masada, it'll be helpful.
 
Random postulate: One should start an althist NES with a BT in order to ease the NESers into the world and set their policy choices in motion gradually, rather than having a "Year the world went mad" every time a new NES springs up.

Just throwing it out there.
I always liked this idea. I think the only reason I didn't employ it for DaNES II was my general impatience and desire to get to the meat of the game. Stupid Dachs.
 
Did I ever settle on what year is it, anyway? 1940? 1938? I'll think about the leaders. Anyway, Lenin is dead (but his cause lives on), but yeah, Berlin is mighty popular among the Red emigration, though so is Geneve. The other Russian emigres tend to prefer London, or even America; the new and improved France somehow hasn't really caught on with a few exceptions. Then again, more politically-~neutral people stayed in Russia, including Sikorsky which is part of the reason why the Russian air force is so great. No Philosopher's Ship if you know what I'm talking about, either.

Hey das, have you thought up of any political leadership tidbits in what I'm sure is your very busy summer? ;)
 
Were the Irish colonials state-sponsored or migrants who wished to maintain some sort of nominal connection with the homeland?
 
The Fall of the Roman Empire, 453-482.

“Any way the wind blows,
Doesn’t really matter to me…to me.”
-Queen, Bohemian Rhapsody

In 453, Attila the Hun, ruler of a continent-spanning empire, the Scourge of God, and the terror of both East and West, died. His empire, bereft of his dominating personality and military prowess, rapidly crumbled around his corpse. All the subject peoples the Huns had forced into military slavery over the previous decades turned against Attila’s sons one by one.

Neither of the two Roman Empires, in East and West, would gain much benefit from this collapse. True, Attila had been a fearsome opponent, and his invasions had done grievous damage to Roman territory. But in creating his very war machine, Attila had harnessed the energies of many peoples on the move. As the power struggle over his corpse shook itself out north of the Danube, all of the losers in that power struggle streamed south and west, onto Roman territory. At the same time, the fear of Attila that had helped keep Rome’s allies – such as the Visigoths – bound to its side was now gone.

Disaster followed on disaster in the 450s. The Western Roman generalissimo Flavius Ætius was assassinated by Emperor Valentinianus III, who himself was murdered shortly thereafter. The Vandals, pirate-lords of Carthage, took advantage of the power struggle that ensued to sail across the Tyrrhenian Sea and sack Rome in 455. Their intervention only exacerbated the fighting between the interests of the Gallic Roman aristocracy and Italian nobility. Eventually, with the backing of the warlord Flavius Ricimerus, Valerius Maiorianus ascended to the imperial throne, placated the special interests, and prepared to right the ship of state.

Maiorianus’ plan for Roman recovery was simple: reconquer Vandal Africa. The African provinces, the richest of the Western Empire, would be able to subsidize further conquests. They did not need to be heavily defended. And by capturing the great port of Carthage, the grain route to Italy would be reopened, ameliorating many of the economic and social problems afflicting the Italian peninsula. There was no magic bullet for Rome’s problems, but the reconquest of Africa promised solutions for many of them.

To that end, the Emperor amassed a vast fleet in southern Hispania, intending to follow the Vandals along the very path they themselves took to invade Africa in the 420s. Yet his four years of painstaking buildup came to naught in 461, when Vandal ships surprised the fleet at anchor in Carthago Nova harbor and destroyed it. Maiorianus’ army was left cooling its heels on the Iberian shore, and his personal prestige was wiped out. To make things worse, his careful balancing act had alarmed the Italian magnates, many of whom saw the Gallic aristocracy and the Dalmatian field army eclipsing them in importance. Before the year was out, Maiorianus was murdered.

Ricimerus, who had the title of patricius, now played kingmaker. In Maiorianus’ place, the pious nonentity Libius Severus was raised to the purple. His reign proved even less successful than his predecessor’s. In order to buy loyalty from the Visigoths and other surrounding powers, Ricimerus was forced to cede vital territories in Gaul that weakened the Empire’s position even further. He was unable to achieve the kind of victories that would intimidate allies into staying, and the vicious cycle continued. When his puppet Severus died of natural causes in 465, Ricimerus simply kept the imperial post vacant, and continued to ineffectively campaign against Rome’s peripheral enemies.

He had little intention of keeping the throne vacant for long. Throughout 466 and 467, Ricimerus conducted talks with the Eastern Roman Emperor, Leōn, and with the Eastern generalissimo Aspar. In exchange for military support, Ricimerus struck a deal that would bring an Eastern general, Procopius Anthemius, to Ravenna to become the new Emperor of the West. Leōn and Aspar had their own ulterior motives: Anthemius was a competent soldier, who had held the Danube line against the fallout from the collapse of the Hunnic Empire. Furthermore, he was married to Ælia Marcia Euphemia, only daughter of the late Emperor Markianos. As such, he was a rival for power and a popular figure that needed to be eliminated. That he could be eliminated usefully was just icing on the cake.

In the summer of 467, after defeating the Huns in a siege at Sardikē, Anthemius arrived in Italy with a sizable contingent of Eastern and Western troops and with Marcellinus, the magister militum per Illyricum. He quickly assured himself of Ricimerus’ loyalty by marrying the patricius to his only daughter, Alypia. Much of the rest of 467 was spent in wheeling and dealing. Other than the Italian and Dalmatian field armies, Anthemius didn’t have many assets. There was an Army of Hispania, but, despite being composed of Roman soldiers, it was under Visigothic orders and in Visigothic pay; an Army of the Liger similarly existed, but the Roman troops there were under the orders of the Salian Frankish leader Chilperic. Both Chilperic and the Visigothic leader Evareiks had to be brought into alignment with the new regime. Even a deputation of major Gallic magnates came to Rome to seek Anthemius’ favor.

Anthemius knew that Maiorianus had been right: Africa was the key. The only problems had been in the execution, and in the vagaries of chance; fundamentally, the idea was sound. It just had to be bigger. This time, the Eastern Empire was getting involved. Thirty thousand Eastern soldiers under the command of Basiliskos, one of the magistri militum præsentales, massed in Thracian harbors. Marcellinus’ Dalmatian field army was readied to seize Sicily and Sardinia. Even in Egypt, the Eastern general Herakleios built up an army to invade Vandal Tripolitania. In total, some fifty thousand ground troops and even more naval personnel would participate in the unified offensive of 468.

That the invasion went off without a hitch this time is a testament more to how badly the Vandals were numerically outclassed. Garrisons on Sicily and Sardinia were mopped up during the spring by Marcellinus’ army, so that Basiliskos’ armada was in place to catch the beginning of the sailing season in June. The Roman plan prescribed avoiding battle with the Vandal fleet; the admirals were to focus chiefly on getting boots on the ground in Africa. In this they were aided by the seasonal winds, which carried the fleet past the Mercurii Promontorium into harbor at Utica. A Vandal fleet was launched from Carthage, hoping for a lucky shift in the wind, but the prevailing winds held and the Vandals were stuck on the wrong side of the cape while Basiliskos offloaded his army.

Genseric, the king of the Vandals and Alans, mustered as much combat power as he could to try to crush the allied beachhead in its infancy. Not far outside Utica, his smaller army attempted to ambush Basiliskos’ troops moving along the forty-mile coastal road to Carthage. The aging king failed to maintain command and control over the various parts of his army, and the Romans were able to successfully defeat it piecemeal. After failing in front of Utica, Genseric retreated into Numidia, leaving Carthage itself uncovered and open to attack. Before the year was out, Carthage and the districts of Byzacena and Proconsularis were garrisoned by Roman troops. Genseric, holed up with what was left of the Vandal and Alan army in Hippo Regius, attempted to negotiate a new treaty arrangement with the Western Roman authorities, but was rebuffed. He conveniently died in the winter of 468-9 amid rumors of treachery and poison, whereupon his followers were captured by the Romans, some as slaves, others dispersed throughout the army to amplify Western Roman combat power.

Of course, the reconquest of Africa wasn’t as quick as all that; nothing is That Easy. Vandal resistance was now negligible, but large numbers of troops remained in and around Carthage, fighting against the various other power centers that had popped up in the interim. Several Romano-Mauretanian petty kingdoms had emerged in western Numidia since the Vandalic war – dubbed by many contemporaries a “Fourth Punic War” – began in the 420s. They were not particularly interested in quiet readmittance to the Roman polity, and had to be…persuaded to change their views. Standard carrot-and-stick methods were employed. The situation was complicated by heavy Mauri raiding and counter-raiding in the African provinces themselves, which necessitated the dispatch of even more Western Roman troops after the Eastern soldiers left in 469.

Still, the Western Roman exchequer got an immediate boost from the African expedition, and revenues continued to pick up as land was reoccupied by the Italian and Gallic absentee landlords that managed to prove (after a fashion) that they had owned territory in Africa before the Vandal conquest. More importantly, Hispania was now accessible to Roman arms and Roman cash. A 470-1 “flag-showing” expedition under the command of a certain Romanus, one of Ricimerus’ protégés, recaptured the Balearic Islands, landed at Carthago Nova, and marched around Carthaginensis for a few months. While somewhat ineffective in military terms, symbolically it was a tremendous boost to Roman prestige in Hispania. It was partially on the strength of Romanus’ expedition that Anthemius was able to dismiss the Visigoth-nominated comes Hispaniæ and replace him with his own man, Phylarchus, in late 471.

No attention or cash could be spared for lasting conquests in Hispania, though, as affairs in the Gallic provinces began to take center stage. In the aftermath of the African expedition it rapidly became clear that several of Ricimerus’ appointees in Gaul were actively conspiring with both Visigoths and Franks. In 462 Agrippinus, magister equitum per Gallias, had ceded the port of Narbo to the Visigoths, thus totally cutting off Roman land access to Iberia. After being accused by Ægidius, the commander of the Liger army at the time, he had been tried for treason and sentenced to exile, but was later acquitted under dubious circumstances. Eight years later, the præfectus prætorio Galliarum, Arvandus, was caught sending letters to Evareiks, which harped on the “tyranny” of Anthemius and the danger a resurgent Roman regime posed to the arrangement in the Gallic provinces. Arvandus was arraigned on charges of treason, despite protests from Ricimerus, and was hauled into the docket in Ravenna to stand trial before both senate and emperor. After a defense that implied that he was mentally unstable, Arvandus was executed in early 471.

It was rapidly becoming clear to Ricimerus that Anthemius, unwilling to countenance a man of his clear power and stature, was eliminating his supporters to isolate him, in preparation for an assassination. In particular, Marcellinus of Dalmatia was gaining significant power and influence under Anthemius’ patronage. His nephew, Iulius Nepos, was given the command of comes Africæ. Marcellinus himself took the lead in defeating a group of Alans that invaded Noricum in 470 and was well rewarded for his victory. Anthemius was also placing his own family in charge of more and more of the instruments of state. His son Anthemiolus was given an extraordinary command over Gaul in 470 and spent much of that year amassing a field army in northern Italy, partially an amalgam of the Dalmatian field army, the Italian army, and troops hired from defeated Alans and Sciri with African cash. Another son, Flavius Marcianus, was made consul for 469 and again in 471.

The last piece of the highly confusing Gallic puzzle came into play in early 470, when a sizable army of Britannic troops arrived on the Liger under the command of one Riothamus. Riothamus, who had ended up a loser in insular power struggles, provided yet another potential counterweight to the Evareiks-Ricimerus axis that seemed – to Anthemius, anyway – to be coalescing. After an intensive letter-borne discussion between the Emperor and the Britannic warlord, mediated by the Gallic aristocrat and præfectus urbi Sidonius Apollinaris, Riothamus and Anthemius reached an accord in the spring of 471. The Britannic warlord was granted the title of magister equitum per Gallias, and thereby imperial legitimacy. Hoping to take advantage of his new ally’s military weight, Anthemius demanded that Evareiks return Visigothic Narbonensis. Evareiks refused, and retaliated by attempting to assassinate Phylarchus in the autumn of 471.

In the Gothic War that ensued, Evareiks struggled against enemies that enclosed him from three sides. In Tarraconensis, Phylarchus, after suffering an initial defeat near Cæsaraugusta, rallied and, with the addition of Suebic mercenaries, crushed a Gothic force near Bilbilis. By the end of the year 472 Gothic garrisons south of the Pyrenæi were either in retreat or under siege. Evareiks had more success in Gaul. Hiring Alannic mercenaries to distract Riothamus, he himself marshaled most of his men to fight Anthemiolus on the Rhodanus. Not far from Arausio, the Visigothic army successfully ambushed the Roman army, but Anthemiolus and the dux Sequanicæ, a barbarian by the name of Hermianus, successfully defeated the disorganized Visigoths as they spread out to pursue the Romans. Further campaigns around Arelate were inconclusive, so late in the year Hermianus led Roman troops north and successfully linked up with Riothamus near Avaricum, whereupon the Alans were defeated with serious losses.

Having, so he thought, successfully ameliorated the Visigothic threat, Anthemius attempted to remove Ricimerus’ title of patricius and award it to Marcellinus in the winter of 471-2. Ricimerus promptly used what pull he had with the Italian field army to amass enough troops to try to fight a civil war. His army clashed inconclusively with Marcellinus’ throughout Italian Annonaria during the winter. Ricimerus managed to seize Mantua in February 472 before he died of pneumonia, whereupon his troops dispersed or were hired by Marcellinus. Evareiks attempted to take advantage of the brief civil war by attacking Anthemiolus’ shrunken army at Arelate, but the Romans overwhelmed part of the Visigothic army near Nemausus, and Evareiks was forced to retire. In the north, the Visigoths staved off Riothamus’ army by hiring the Saxons of Duriorigum to attack them. Further south, Phylarchus sparred with Visigothic troops around Narbo, eventually capturing the city by storm in the fall.

The war was interrupted in 474 by even more momentous events further east. During the course of that year, Emperor Leōn died. The last few years of Leōn’s reign had been marked with instability and violence. Just like Anthemius, Leōn distrusted his Germanic generalissimo, Aspar, and had been working to replace him by bringing in the Isaurian Zēnōn. Zēnōn’s son by Leōn’s daughter Ariadne was named the heir to the throne after his 467 birth, while Zēnōn himself ascended to the command first of the Army of Thrace, then to that of the entire eastern field army. At the same time, Leōn undermined Aspar’s authority by supporting the Sciri warlord Odovacar against Aspar’s Ostrogothic allies; in 469 the Emperor was able to bring Odovacar and his Sciri into the Balkans as a counterweight to the Ostrogoths.

Aspar had attempted to strike back, having his son Ardabourios foment a mutiny, but after the magister militum per Thracias, Anagastes, had second thoughts about the conspiracy and informed the emperor, Leōn had both Aspar and his son murdered in 471. In retaliation, the Ostrogothic leader Thiudareiks Strabo seized control of the Thracian field army, augmented it with Ostrogothic and Gepid troops, and laid waste to Thrace, capturing Arkadioupolis. At the same time, other Gepids captured Sirmion on the Danube. During 473, Leōn had pressured Strabo by having Basiliskos, hero of the western campaigns, pressure the Ostrogoths with a small raiding force to deny them supplies, while at the same time offering Strabo confirmation of his Thracian command. In the spring of 474 Strabo agreed, and an uneasy peace had settled over the Balkans.

Or not. Leōn’s arrangement for the succession was inherently unstable, as was made abundantly clear as soon as he died. Zēnōn’s son, who ascended to the purple as Leōn II, was obviously too young to rule at the tender age of 7, so his father assumed the pretensions (and quickly enough, the title) of co-Augustus. This outraged many in Constantinople, who distrusted the Isaurians in general and Zēnōn in particular. Basiliskos, Leo I’s brother-in-law, immediately pressed for his own rights, and garnered significant support as head of the successful African expedition and as one of the two magistri militum præsentales. His sister, the former Empress Verina, lent him her considerable prestige, and he had the backing of Thiudareiks Strabo and even the Isaurian general Illous. As soon as Leōn II died, later in 474, Basiliskos’ cabal successfully expelled Zēnōn from the capital and crowned Basiliskos himself Augustus. While Zēnōn left for Isauria and attempted to gather loyal elements of the eastern field army to aid his cause, Basiliskos sent Strabo, the Ostrogoths, and the Thracian field army in hot pursuit.

In order to solidify his control of the throne, Basiliskos attempted a bargain with the clergy in the capital, stifling his well-known disapproval of the decisions of the 451 Council of Chalkedōn in exchange for restoring Timotheos Ailouros as Pope of Alexandria. The decision essentially took Egypt out of the civil war, as Ailouros’ popularity in Alexandria itself was mitigated by his unpopularity elsewhere. Riots hit Alexandria, immobilizing the small Egyptian field army. Elsewhere, Zēnōn won the fight for the eastern field army, as Herakleios, one of the commanders of the African expedition in 468 and a loyal partisan of Leōn I, was magister militum per Orientem and brought his troops over to Zēnōn’s side. Before the year was out, Herakleios’ army clashed inconclusively with Thiudareiks Strabo’s polyglot force near Synnada in Phrygia Salutaris.

At the same time, Basiliskos made Illous one of the magistri militum præsentales and kept him in Europe to guard the Balkan frontier. The Gepids that had captured Sirmion, however, were still a major threat. Illous attempted to bring them to battle outside Taurision in Dardania and was badly defeated, allowing the Gepids to sack Skopia. The præsental army confronted the Gepids again on their way back north, near Naissos, and was again defeated. With Verina’s connivance, Basiliskos sacked Illous and, to boost his popularity, permitted the citizens of the capital to massacre the Isaurians residing there. He replaced the Isaurian with Anagastes, the turncoat from Aspar’s plot of 471. Illous fled to Isauria and reentered Zēnōn’s service.

These eastern wars presented Anthemius with an opportunity. He had links to both sides in the civil war, and a plausible claim on the eastern throne himself. Conceivably, a western intervention could tip the balance one way or another. But Western resources were not equal to the task of a brushfire war in Africa, a major war in southern Gaul, and an intervention in the East. As it was, even with African cash and grain, the Romans were making heavy weather of their military obligations. An Eastern intervention could only work if Anthemius came to terms with the Visigoths. During late 474, the Romans opened channels to Evareiks, sounding him out on possible terms, but the Visigoths were adamant: either Narbo must be returned, or Riothamus must lose his imperial titles and recognition and be fodder for the Visigothic army. Neither condition, needless to say, was acceptable.

Strabo and the Ostrogoths, in the meantime, were hard pressed in Anatolia. Confronted with the entire eastern field army, the Ostrogoths had been forced to stage a fighting retreat into Bithynia in the winter of 474-5. Insistently, Strabo demanded the transfer of more troops, duly granted by Basiliskos, who hired Gepid, Sciri, and Alan mercenaries and sent them across the Bosphorus. With the new troops, Strabo landed a defeat on the Isaurians at Pessinous and captured the Isaurian commander, Zēnōn’s brother Longinos. To make up the shortfall in troops, Herakleios withdrew soldiers from the eastern frontier, which they had been guarding against the Sāsānians. This new influx of troops held the line in Pisidia, but at the cost of badly weakening Roman defenses in the east.
 
Further west, the Gothic war ground on, as increasingly outnumbered Visigothic armies were penned up in Aquitania by the Western Roman coalition. Anthemiolus and Phylarchus joined their armies to launch a spring 475 descent on the Gothic capital of Tolosa, which Evareiks narrowly warded off. Riothamus’ army, in the meantime, was secure enough to move south again. Busily marching to and fro to keep the two armies from uniting, Evareiks was eventually defeated by Riothamus in a major battle near Vesunna. The defeated Visigoths sued for peace in early 476, as Anthemiolus renewed the siege of Tolosa, whereby their territories were reduced to parts of Aquitania, though not so much that they were forced back to their original territories of 418 along the Garumna River.

Anthemius’ victory in the Gothic war did not immediately free him to intervene in the East. Western military power under the more or less direct control of the Emperor was essentially incipient. Before the African expedition, the West had disposed of basically a field army and a half; its troop strength was rising, based in large part on the incorporation of defeated enemy troops, although Italian recruitment was up. Anthemius’ regime still had no control over the field army on the Liger, which still took orders and pay from Childeric, who had to be conciliated; it likewise could not control the Burgundiones. (The Burgundiones also could not control themselves. Ricimerus’ death had thrown them into civil war.) And there were ever so many alternate pressures on the Western Roman army. Roman Noricum, loosely controlled at best, was under serious raiding from Rugi, Heruli, and Torcilingi groups, and had to be rescued by Anthemiolus’ army. Phylarchus was forced to respond to Suebi aggrandizement, since the Visigoths that had held them in check were no longer an effective force south of the Pyrenæi; the Roman army in Hispania was drawn into campaigns around Ulixippida and Scallabis, unable to restore order in the majority of the peninsula.

In sum, the West was fully too busy with its own troubles to bother about the goings-on on the other side of the Adriatic. Another neighbor of the Eastern Roman Empire was not so occupied. Pērōz I, Šāh-an-šāh of Iran and Aniran, had recently been humbled by the power of the Hayāṭila on his northeastern border. Where better to take out his frustration than against the Romans? Already during the reign of Leōn I, Sāsānian arms had conquered Lazikē, a Roman satellite state. Beginning in 475, as Roman troops left the frontier denuded to fight in the civil war, Pērōz began to raid Roman Mesopotamia and Osroene. The following year, Sāsānian troops besieged and captured Martyropolis, aided by treachery from inside the powerful fortress’s walls. A second expedition, later that year, entered Roman territory from the Araxes valley and plundered Theodosioupolis.

While the frontier was eroding to the east, Strabo incessantly kept up the fight against the Isaurian faction in Anatolia. But even he was aware that his ally Basiliskos was slipping. The inability to crush the Isaurian uprising and the military failures against the Gepids were leading to widespread discontent, even in the capital. Egypt was still in stasis, and Timotheos Ailouros remained unpopular outside of Alexandria. His opportunity came in early 477, as Zēnōn and Herakleios were briefly immobilized by internecine disputes and the need to juggle the civil war and the incipient Sāsānian war. After repeated Gepid defeats in the Balkans, Anagastes was replaced as magister militum per Thracias by the Sciri Odovacar, a shockingly poor choice by Basilikos. This was not due to Odovacar’s competence or lack thereof, but his rivalry with the Ostrogoths that were ascendant in the Eastern court. Odovacar quickly came to a deal with the Gepid raiders, rebelled, and sent part of his army to plunder Thrace.

Basiliskos’ government was paralyzed. Seizing the opportunity, Strabo countermarched to Bithynia and blackmailed the Emperor, threatening to abandon Constantinople if he were not elevated to patricius, as Aspar had been, and awarded land in which to settle in the prosperous territories of Asia. Basiliskos initially agreed, throwing in the consulship for good measure. The Emperor also attempted to murder a possible rival of Strabo’s for control of the Ostrogoths, Thiudareiks Amal, who had been a hostage in the capital for some years, but Amal escaped and fled to Odovacar’s army. Strabo departed to organize his Goths to head across the Hellespont, but during his absence Basiliskos had second thoughts. Trusting in the Constantinopolitan fortifications to protect the capital from the Sciri, he rescinded Strabo’s titles and land grants. When word got back to the Ostrogoths, Strabo predictably flew into a rage and openly rebelled with the backing of the (formerly Thracian) field army. By the summer of 477, Basiliskos had been lynched by the citizens of the capital, who raised the civil servant Sebastianos to the purple in his stead. Basiliskos’ nephew Armatos, who had been serving with a small detachment in Syria, immediately opened channels to Pērōz I, asking for military support for his own claim to the throne.

Sebastianos, who made a big show about reluctantly assuming the purple, clearly wanted to employ his very imperium as a bargaining chip with Zēnōn, whom he contacted directly. The Isaurian faction was offered the capital on a silver platter, with Sebastianos himself demanding only an extraordinary military command in Roman Armenia to fight the Sāsānians, and his son to be named Cæsar and heir to Zēnōn. The Isaurian promptly agreed, took ship to Constantinople, and occupied the city. After awarding Sebastianos his command and making his son heir, Zēnōn had the son tonsured and the father murdered, and consigned Leōn I’s widow Verina to a monastery. He himself then organized the defense of the capital from Odovacar, who besieged Constantinople from August to October 477 without success. Finally, Zēnōn opened channels to the Sāsānians to try to negotiate an end to the war.

Pērōz I knew a winning hand when he had one. His most recent war with the Hayāṭila, though it had been unsuccessful, had more or less closed that frontier of military action for the time being. He was under no serious time constraints, and the war with Rome was making him more money than he was losing by mobilizing his army. The Sāsānian despot believed that with such an opportunity as the civil war, at the very least the Romans ought to have to give up several major frontier fortresses and a belt of intermediary Sāsānian puppets. But Zēnōn was unwilling to concede any more than recognition of Sāsānian control over Lazikē and a cash indemnity. The gains to be made were negligible, and the potential benefits of staying in the war far outweighed any immediate ones to be gained by leaving the field. The šāh-an-šāh instead cultivated his connections with Armatos in Syria and continued his raids on the eastern prefectures.

In 478, Marcellinus, patricius of the Western Roman Empire, died after coughing up blood. Foul play was not suspected, although some Christian chroniclers attributed the messy death to the patricius’ paganism. Strikingly, Anthemius did not nominate a new patricius to replace him, although court opinion had held that Phylarchus or Iulius Nepos would be next in line. Instead, Anthemiolus was given the title of magister utriusque militiæ and ordered to campaign in Hispania, and Flavius Marcianus was given some leftovers and ordered to campaign against the relatively harmless Heruli. As the fighting in Africa was finally beginning to wind down, Nepos was sent to Gaul to campaign against the Burgundiones, in an effort to keep him from establishing a semi-independent fiefdom as his uncle had. This was given new urgency by Phylarchus, who had come to an agreement with the Suebi in 477 and promptly revolted, attempting to parlay his outsize Iberian field army into a personal kingdom. Upon revolting, Phylarchus managed to gain the support of Evareiks and the Visigoths as well, reopening the Gothic war.

Even without the civil war in Hispania, though, the Western Empire could hardly have effectively intervened in the east. Zēnōn’s loyalists were fighting a two-front war in Anatolia and slowly losing both fights, while the Emperor himself had no resources in Thrace with which to ward off Odovacar. In some desperation Zēnōn offered Odovacar command of one of the præsental field armies (which, to all intents and purposes, did not really exist) and land for the Sciri north of the Haimos Mountains, which was rejected. He attempted to resettle Strabo’s Ostrogoths in Armenia to help block the Sāsānians, but Strabo demanded better lands which wouldn’t have put the Ostrogoths in a position to be militarily effective at all. So the Eastern Empire continued to be slowly ground down. Antiocheia nearly fell by treachery to Armatos in 478, but declared for Zēnōn after serious riots. Thessalonike did fall to Odovacar’s army, which sacked the city, causing riots in Constantinople. And the Sāsānians captured Edessa in Osroene, which as far as the frontier was concerned turned the clock back a century.

By 479, Zēnōn was on the ropes. While the capital was more or less impregnable to attack by Odovacar and the Gepids, both of whom had essentially overrun the peninsula, the rest of the war was going very poorly. The Emperor was considering fleeing the city for Isauria again, lest he have been lynched like Basiliskos. During that spring, though, events moved against him. Herakleios, who needed to salvage what he could of the eastern field army, staged a fighting retreat through central Anatolia to Nikaia, whereupon he and a picked body of men crossed the Straits and staged a coup in Constantinople. Zēnōn was murdered and Herakleios ascended to the purple in his place, bringing Verina out of her monastery to lend some legitimacy to his new regime as a “trusted” advisor.

Initially, Herakleios believed he could make a fight of it. Save Syria, which was occupied by Armatos’ armies, most of the wealthiest taxpaying regions of the Empire were still under his control: western Anatolia, coastal Greece, and Egypt. He still had a field army (and a half) near the capital, control of much of the navy, and was working to open channels to some of the combatants to try to achieve terms. The appearance of power was illusory at best, though. Egypt could not be counted upon at all; after Timotheos Ailouros kicked the bucket in late 478, his popularly acclaimed replacement, Petros Mongos, turned out to be even more vociferously anti-Chalkedōnian than his predecessor had been. Part of the fleet mutinied at Ephesos over pay arrears in April 479 and went cruising around the Aegean, raiding and plundering under the leadership of one Martinianos. And to demonstrate how insecure western Anatolia actually was, Thiudareiks Strabo, who had set up shop in Galatia with most of his Ostrogoths, went on an extended raid along the Aegean coast in the early summer of 479, which Herakleios’ general Moschianos was unable to prevent. The Ostrogoths nearly captured Tralles and did capture Aphrodisias, capital of Karia province, before being forced to pull back to Kappadokia to fight Sāsānian raiders.

Petros Mongos clearly had to go, but Herakleios’ choice of replacement was uninspiring at best. Timotheos Salophakiolos had already served in Alexandria before riots brought Ailouros into the driver’s seat; his pro-Chalkedōn stand would not play well in Pieria. Predictably, his return inflamed Alexandria again. A local Miaphysite garrison commander, one Stephanos, elected to support the anti-Chalkedōn rioters. He kicked out Salophakiolos and claimed the title of comes et magister militum per Ægyptias, demanding imperial recognition of his new position as he busily recruited regular troops and attempted to construct something of a navy.

The loss of Egypt crippled Herakleios’ regime and forced him to come to terms with some of his opponents. Odovacar was offered Thrace and Makedonia on which to settle his Sciri, the post of patricius, and the consulship for 480, which the Sciri warlord snapped up more or less instantly. His troops pulled back from their siege of Athens and moved north, fighting Gepids as they went. Herakleios then sacked Moschianos and replaced him with one Kottomenēs, who had successfully waged naval war against Martinianos’ raiders. Kottomenēs managed a narrow victory over part of Strabo’s Ostrogoths near Thyateira during the winter of 479-80. Combined with an autumn 479 defeat at the hands of the Sāsānians west of Sebasteia, the Ostrogoths were ready to come to terms. In 480, Strabo accepted terms that permitted the Ostrogoths to settle in Galatia, Kappadokia, and western Armenia, and which gave him the command of magister militum per Orientem. While less ideal than those he originally coveted – lands near the Aegean – these were prosperous enough, and the stick was big enough to make him think twice about continuing the fight.

Herakleios never stopped trying to split his various enemies and right the ship of state. In order to fight against the Sāsānians and Armatos, whom he considered the chief dangers, the Emperor confirmed Stephanos in his extraordinary command. This had the salutary effect of simplifying the situation in the Levant. From 477, the Roman foederati phylarchy of the Banū Salīh had basically split, with various constituent tribes supporting one claimant to the throne or another. The situation was complicated by the intervention of the Sāsānian-allied Banū Lakhm, which raided heavily amongst the Salīhid-protected Levant. With Herakleios’ pronouncement, many of the remaining Salīhids affixed themselves to Stephanos’ armies, while the others cast their lot in with Armatos and the Sāsānian-allied Romans. Heavy fighting broke out in Phoinike, with Stephanos’ garrison troops and ill-trained “regulars” generally coming off worse against Sāsānian and Syrian soldiers. Stephanos was thus unable to relieve Antiocheia before it fell to Armatos in the fall of 480.

Odovacar successfully limited the Gepid raids south of the Haimos during the course of 480 and 481, aided by a surprising development: a small detachment of troops from the West under the command of one Ecdicius. In 480, Phylarchus and his Suebic allies had finally been crushed in a climactic set-piece battle outside of Ocelodurum by Anthemiolus. Gothic pretensions were limited by the actions of Riothamus in conjunction with the Liger field army of Childeric. Evareiks had attempted to employ the Burgundiones, led by the victor in their civil war, Godegisel, but Ecdicius and the general Thorisarius successfully warded off that threat in a series of complicated campaigns in southern Gaul, ultimately kick-starting a second Burgundian civil war. In sum, the Western Empire was somewhat able to dispatch a small force of some 7,000 troops, mostly Herulian and Hunnic mercenaries, to aid the Eastern Emperor. Ecdicius’ army played a large part in destroying a sizable raiding force of Sabartoi that had allied with the Gepid ruler Draserich in Dacia Ripensis.

Ecdicius was uninterested in meddling in Eastern Imperial politics. After he died in the relief of a Gepid siege of Ratiaria in the winter of 482, his second in command, one Orestes, replaced him. Orestes, an interesting figure in his own right, had been the scion of a Pannonian family and spent time as a hostage at the Hunnic court of Attila during the 440s. He proved more willing to work with Herakleios’ schemes, and was duly appointed magister militum per Thracias in the Eastern army. The Emperor planned to have him act as a counterweight to Odovacar and his ambitions, and as such installed Orestes’ Western troops as guards in the capital, replacing Odovacar’s men. Orestes was also given control of the Vigla, the city watch. Herakleios erred in trusting the slippery Pannonian. Within two months, the Emperor himself was forced to flee the city after Orestes unsuccessfully attempted to murder him. Herakleios fled to the western coast of Anatolia, his old stomping grounds, where he rallied what troops he could.

Orestes, casting about for a suitable puppet emperor to replace Herakleios, picked the pirate leader Martinianos, who had conquered Crete and could lend his sizable fleet to preventing Herakleios from recrossing the Straits. This move may have made sense from a purely short-term perspective, kind of, but it proved to be suicidal. The obvious loser was Odovacar, who immediately marched on Constantinople. Martinianos’ fleet proved useless against Odovacar’s Sciri, Gepid, and Roman troops, who invested the capital within a few weeks. Orestes and Martinianos were lynched on 17 July 482, and the citizens of Constantinople opened the gates of the Theodosian Walls to Odovacar’s army.

It was not immediately clear what Odovacar’s recourse might be. He was not a plausible candidate for the imperium himself, and considered it a dubious honor at best that at worst might bring the other players in the East down on his head. At the same time, he distrusted Herakleios too much to readmit him to the capital; the entire reason the Eastern Emperor had been displaced was because of a plot gone awry. Instead, he offered the imperial regalia to Anthemius at Ravenna. The Western Emperor always had been a plausible candidate for the Eastern throne, with his familial connections and history. Anthemius knew that he himself couldn’t really do much to justify claiming the eastern imperium; sending Ecdicius’ expedition had been something of a strain in itself, and that had been a disaster. Instead, he sent the regalia back, with an attached letter chastising the Eastern Senate for not returning the trappings of power to their rightful holder, Herakleios. As far as Anthemius was concerned, there still was an Eastern Emperor, albeit holed up far outside the capital.

It has been argued that the Eastern Roman Empire did not, in fact, cease to be on 17 July 482. After all, there was still an Eastern Emperor, and by that point in time the Emperors in Constantinople had ceased to exercise any “real” power. This argument is unsustainable. The Eastern Emperor’s writ ceased to run in Constantinople, and as it turned out, no Emperor would ever rule from the city again. As for lacking any “real” power, even up to 479 and 480, the Eastern Emperors were able to mount serious military expeditions to attempt to restore their authority, and the very plot that ejected Herakleios from the capital was designed to wipe out his political rivals and restore a semblance of control. The Eastern Roman Empire, contrary to belief, went down kicking and screaming all the way. In fact, the fact that, after 482, it ceased to do so was something that contemporaries noticed. The Gallic aristocrat and præfectus urbi Sidonius Apollinaris marked the date of 17 July in his famous correspondence, and it was similarly recorded by even ecclesiastical chroniclers in Iberia.

Even so, there is much to be said for the view that, for most of the inhabitants of what used to be the Eastern Roman Empire, little changed. It is not as though, before 482, all Easterners spoke Latin, and after that date, they began to use Coptic, Syriac, and Greek; it was not a matter, in Egypt, of putting away the togas and getting out the pharaonic hats. The average person’s life continued much as it had beforehand; taxes paid to the same taxmen, soldiers recruited and armed and organized much the same way, trade links running more or less the same way, similar coins used in the marketplace. The religious questions remained much the same as they had been before Martinianos was executed. Thus one can argue not merely for catastrophe in the fall of the Eastern Roman Empire, but also for continuation; they are not polar opposites of the debate, but sides of the same coin.

It has been remarked that throughout the collapse of the Eastern Roman state, none of the major actors were actually trying to destroy it. Nobody really believed it was possible to destroy it, up to the very end. Everybody was trying to make a better place for himself in the hierarchy of the state, with the symbols of the state, employing the framework of the state. Thus it can be said that the Eastern Roman Empire did not die a natural death, yet also it was not assassinated. The Eastern Roman Empire committed suicide by accident.

OOC: I couldn’t resist stealing and altering a few good lines from various modern historians of the period. It’s a work in progress.

Also, I'll be making semi-regular maps of the situation. This is not a finished TL by any stretch of the imagination.

Comments/constructive criticism?

Spoiler Mediterranean Littoral, 482 :
mediterraneanlittoral48.png
 
Back
Top Bottom