In this alternate history scenario I explore a world where the Western Roman Empire managed to survive, while the Eastern Roman, or Byzantine Empire fell. In a sense, an opposite world of the one we know.
3:34 Byzantine Anatolia: "Thank you Sassanids, you freed us from the Caliphate!" Sassanids: "Oh I wouldn't say freed, more like under new management..."
The biggest criticism of mine would be the assumption that Rome continuously had competent, or "better than absolutely insane" emperors in this alt timeline.
Usually Rome expanded even when under bad emperors due to the fact that the praetorian guard were the ones which assassinated and placed emperors on the throne in the majority of cases and so wielded significant influence within the Empire. Because of this fact, the militarist and expansionist praetorian guard were able to expand the Empire.
in the real timline rome only had a handful of truly terrible emperors in its almost 2000 years of existance. Even if there are a few really bad ones, there would most likely also be some Augustus/Aurelian level great ones to balance it out and keep rome powerful
I think you forgotten the fact that the majority of the grain in the Roman Empire came from Egypt. There will be many more large famines, as we’ve seen causes a lot of assassinations.
@@Beyonder1987actually yeah I think there was I mean I don’t know for a fact but North Africa was the bread basket of the empire. In fact the government subsided much of the grain industry in Africa.
The implementation of a version of the theme system in the West might make strides to combine agricultural output and civil defense but yeah there would probably be a gap. The push into Germany might be partially driven by the desire to reappropriate land and clear forests for farmland.
Interesting and well thought out but I have a few criticisms: 1. If The West didn’t fall, I seriously doubt the East would fall, there was to many ingrained advantages the the East had 2. I think you allow to have the west maintaining to much land, I could see a Redoubt forming around Italy, Tunisia, Libya, Dalmatia, Southern France and the islands 3. I can’t imagine the Arabs being able to take and hold the east with west Rome still existing, I could see a Justinian style reconquest after the disintegration of the eastern Roman Empire and attack when all three of the east are weak But this is just my critique great video!!!!
It’s not inconceivable the eastern empire was nearly razed to the ground from Attila the Hun and the east lost much of its army when it tried to retake Roman Africa from the vandals. Yes the east definitely had some advantages but there were a few times that the west could’ve rebounded.
@@pocketman202it was the location. Anatolia and constantinople was just perfect location to hold a capital and heartland of the empire. It has the geography as advantage unlike the flat lands of Italy
People seams to not realize growing division between East and West. East Rome basically stop speak Latin and basically become only Rome by name. As such increasingly ostracized Latin Provinces, would elect own Emperor in one time or another. Meanwhile Constantinople was facing extremely powerful Islamic conquest and being de facto self-isolated and passive. They would fall in one time or another. While in West Rome religion would be over time strong enough glue for them to launch own campaigns against Arabs. What is, what basically did happen. Dues Vult
I find it hard to believe the Western Roman Empire would remain so stable for so long. One would assume it would behave somewhat similarily to China, where it would colapse into huge civil wars every couple of centuries, and then sucessor states attempt to reunify it.
I've been looking for a good Western Roman Empire alternate history for a while, so thanks a lot! My only real criticism is I think it's kind of silly that Rome would rebrand itself as Latinia. Surely by this point everyone would be so thoroughly Romanized that they'd never give up the name, and would just go back to being the Roman Republic.
First of, Roman Citizen didn't replace local populations like in video game. While Latinized, they would still have own dialects of Latin and post-barbaric traditions. Rome would become more a symbol then actual entity, as there were objective reasons why city lost importance after Edict of Caracalla. As such they would most likely use name of strongest province, then switch to more Sacred version of Empire. Only to rebounce in game of great powers and finally probably unite by peaceful means. Like, you know. What it actually did happen.
@@TheRezro I disagree via my understanding that the Byzantine Empire still called themselves Roman a thousand years after they lost Rome, and I heard that the population still called themselves Roman for centuries EVEN after being conquered by the Ottomans. Less than having a dialect of Latin, these were Greek speakers, who didn't have the city of Rome, and weren't even on the Italian Peninsula. But most importantly, having this alternate history go from the Roman Empire to the Roman Republic activates my history autism.
@@basedstreamingatcozy-dot-t7126 I'm not talking here about Byzantine. Beside that they become culturally more Greek, actually proving the point. But contrary to modern perception based on Anglosphere media (what was only marginally Roman), people in West Europe in fact also did recognize themselves as Romans (especially in Romania). Even if they also did identify themselves with local province. The same way as someone don't stop being American when he call himself a Californian. And that is exactly what happen in West Rome. There was no Germanic conquest. I mean, there were few incidents (especially Longobards), but actually majority of Germans were allowed to enter Rome as form of alliance against Attila. And later they serve in Legions, gaining local influence. In fact it is why they were roaming so freely. With Byzantine becoming more Greek and ignoring Roman citizenship of Latin speaking population. Empire fall apart. But it is not that people stop being Roman. In fact even when Byzantine fall they officially transfer title of Emperor to Spain. What at the time was strongest. And for reminder Otton III of HRE also was Byzantine royalty. Notion of West being West Rome (because it always was) was not that weird in Medieval Times. Where most people did recognize some level of unity by Roman Christianity. It was somewhat ignored in age of Nationalism. But those influences never go away.
Historically, the Roman Empire did always refer to itself as the Roman Republic, even after it no longer functioned as one, similar to many modern-day authoritarian regimes that call themselves a "Republic". Even the Byzantine Empire continued to call itself Rome. It's highly unlikely that a continued Western Empire would change it's name.
Hey this is gonna sound suspiciously specific but aren't you the guy who left comments on Wynncraft Musescore music by Xeoran? I am also a Xeoran Wynncraft piano sheet music enjoyer. small world
Honestly the East was too well positioned to just die like the Western Empire fell. The West honestly could have survived in a reduced form like the East later did. The Franks though would be a major rival for the west like how the Bulgarians were for the Eastern Empire. The Sassanids even in otl while conquering parts of the East were severely overstretched. They couldn’t hold such lands for so long.
I agree. The West should have consolidated hard around Italy and Africa (Tunisia) and tried to focus on holding those provinces while letting the barbarians overrun the other provinces that were of lesser value. One the Barbarian waves begin to lessen, the Western Empire could have broken out and reconquered.
Dude, this is sooo underrated! I've never seen such a detailed video! (Also how did poland developed so far east? I don't think you mentioned it and I couldn't find a reason)
Great scenario, but I have two criticisms. First Rome wouldnt just rename itself Latinia, they would call themselves something like the second roman republic. Second, with a strong Rome and a Sassanid empire that isnt weakened by the war against the Byzantines, there is no way Islam is able to expand like this, they would propably be driven back to the Arab peninsula and completely die out within a century at most
Theyre gonna have trouble making a lot of headway into the deserts of the penninsula. And with the collapse of the east the Arab islamic powers will have chunks of the eastern meddeterrainian to fall back on for extra strength.
The idea of the western part outright conquering stuff from the east only makes sense if you think the Western/Eastern Roman Empires were different states in competition with eachother, which is false. The split was purely to help with the administration of the empire. Until the fall of the west, it was still just one Roman Empire, but with two different centers of administration...
I think this was sort of a callback to the real world events of the byzantines reconquering parts of Italy AFTER the west had already fallen. Could be wrong, in which case I agree with you
@@KingoftheWelsh Prettysure thats what he was going for. And the video had the remaining parts of the eastern empire actually becoming more of a junior partner rather then being conquered
This is pretty cool, and very well done. One question, though; how did the Islamic caliphates survive in Egypt and the Levant? In this scenario, the Byzantine systems had become corrupted and disappeared before they arrived, meaning they would lack that "head start" to form a stable empire. Plus, the border in North Africa between the Fatimid and Roman Empire seem hard to defend, for either side. I think the odds of a heavily Christianized, and stable, Western Roman Empire, seeing another religion conquer the "holy land" (And, what they perceived, to be rightful Roman land), in addition to the regions being extremely rich, economically, and *not* hating them are very slim. Now, would they win? That's another question (I'd argue yes, as in this scenario they're essentially just Egypt with some Arabian holdings). Either way, Rome would probably we *way* more active of a power in the Western Med. Side note: How did the West reform to retain stability? My favorite method's always been a Senate-Elected successor, stronger constitution, and a loyal Officer Corps. (I would also bet that the printing press would be invented far earlier, as Senatorial campaigns require a lot of writing)
I agree, I think Western Rome would at least try to take Egypt. Another scenario is that Western Rome could have made the Muslims a vassal (similar to Ptolemaic Egypt) and defend them from Sassanids and Greeks.
FInally some Centuries Spanning Alt-Hist, and with that goodness of Stats for the Alternate World, and With having Few Centuries of still centralized State would certainly Make Industrial Revolution come Faster, Either Way It was super Enjoyable so thank you for the Hard Work. And Man Seeing Germany be so different Looking and Poland really is weird but i loved it none the less.
Good alternate history must come from factual possibilities. And we can't ask what if Roman Empire would not fall, it it actually never did. East Rome basically made it up, to cancel citizenship of Latin Population. Fun fact: Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, French and Romanian are in fact dialects of Latin. Rome was not conquered by Germans, because those Germans were literally a Roman Citizens operating as auxiliaries to Legions.
@@TheRezro And i don't give a rat's ass about a Possible Alternate History i want some Good Alternate History, since if i wanted to watch some Possible History i would watch a documentary so stop bothering people that's don't care
@@TheRezro Good Alternate History is an Alternate History that is Intresting as otherwise it's better to just read actual history since it has more depth
Loved your video. I would propose that the Mt. Lebanon area would be organized into rump state, as it was in our world, playing off the major powers against each other. Such a state would have the sea to the west. The Lebanese and Anti-Lebanese Mountains to the East, the environs of Antioch to the North and Mt. Hebron
Great video Neatling I'm not your editor you can do you want with your channel but I have a few ideas if you haven't already thought of them. What if both western and eastern Rome fell what if the Mongol empire never existed what if the bronze age collapse never happened what if goliath killed David what if ww1 never happened what if the Europeans partitioned china in the nineteenth century like they did Africa what if the Americas where never discovered just a couple of ideas
I personally feel things would be a bit different than what you described, though thats part of the wonders of Alt-History, everyone could have different views on outcomes. Like I don't really see The Western Roman Emprie staying that big for that long. I would imagine that the british isles would end up out of the empire and be more of a blend of celtic and scandinavian. Alongside more land would be lost around the Netherlands and Luxembourg. Also I feel with a version of enlightenment and revoloutionary thought there would be more breakaway states in Latinia.
That's kind of my feeling as well, though I might just be looking for a scenario with more parallels in direction with the historical ERE. I was thinking similarly that a collapse in the east might take some pressure away from the west, but I was imagining a scenario where northern Gaul would still be lost, along with Britain. Narbonensis and northern Italy becoming a sometimes contested frontier. I could see Egypt being retained/reconquered by the west at least for a time after the fall of the east.
Or the opposite. Without Charlemagne, the Western Rome could have had the Charlemagne-like expansion into Germany and taken the lands that would eventually encompass the HRE.
I really appreciate this video for several reasons. It's very well-thought-out and focuses on the wider world instead of just Rome. However, two things I disagree with are: 1. Arab Expansion: I think you hit the nail on the head with Sassanian expansion, as the Sassanian always wanted to recreate the old Achaemenid Persian Empire, however if the east collapsed, it would not have led to the disastrous wars which would have led to the power vacuum which was the catalyst for Muslim expansion. Without the Byzantine-Sassanian wars, Islam would likely spread more gradually or would stay within Arabia altogether. 2. Early Renaissance: With a quicker collapse of the east, we would see Persia preserve Greek cities like Alexandria, and we would also see an exodus of Greeks into the Roman Empire. In our timeline, one of the causes of the Renaissance was the influx of Greek ideas into Italy after the fall of Constantinople, and with the likely preservation of classical works by the Sassanians, we might see a much more rapidly advancing civilization not just in Rome but in Western Eurasia altogether, which would have unforseen consequences on European imperialism, if imperialism were to still occur of course. Overall, a great video, I just couldn't resist putting in my two cents!
I disagree with the slavery part of the video. By the late Roman empire slavery was already being faze out. And i don't see the possibility of a transatlantic slave trade. The Portuguese learned of the slave trade from the arabs but in this timeline they are weaker so that is unlikely to happen. Because there isn't an arab slave trade. That also significantly changes the history of africa.
I would like to see a 'What if the Achaemenids Came Back' after the death of Alexander. The last living Achaemenid dynasty members was Amestris Achaemenid and her sons who were rulers out of the city of Heraclea Pontica.
"In the midst of battle, when chaos reigns and fear grips the heart, remember this: the true battlefield lies within oneself. Conquer the doubts, the temptations of weakness, and the tumult of emotions. For it is not the external foe that defines victory, but the inner strength and resilience of the warrior's spirit." - Marcus Aurelius
I've a question. Would the Baltic lands really be conquered by Germanic and Slavic peoples in this timeline, considering even the Teutonic Order failed?
Very cool, I had not thought about the changes caused by a stronger Sassanid and was not expecting you to go as far down the line as colonisation, a colonial Rome would be a very interesting idea.
I also think this isnt a crazy scenario, the East was often the first ones to get the brunt of the invasions, they just couldn't go far due to reforms that happened when it came to the fortified cities, and Constantinople of course. The West was just an easier target and so that's where people went. Not to mention the Huns(and goths) took the wealth out of the East, the smaller tribes only had one place to go.
Great video. Though i think industrialisation and such technological advancements would have come much earlier. Take note: rome was already practicing an early form of industrial manufacturing with small factories to produce refined goods like dye and potted fish, etc. I though it was very interesting that the anglo-saxons still managed to become a single entity in this scenario. Good watch.
4:34 Milan became so prosperous that in the the 700s they have not one but TWO Duomos! Way before the completion of the actual one in the late XIX century. Thus creating the neogothic style 1000 years before our timeline
There’d probably be no England, France, Spain, or Portugal. Considering that the collapse of the western portion of the empire allowed those countries to be established.
I love that this video actually creates an alternate timeline rather than just saying "I can't accurately predict this because it is so different" like thats the whole point of alternate history, its not supposed to be accurate or similar to today's timeline.
Good video, but one small suggestion is to maybe switch up country naming convention a little. Because ending every country in Europe with a "ia" sounds a bit weird.
Likely somewhat diverse, being home to several minority groups. But majority Germanic. The Germanic people in this scenario live much further east. And the Kingdom of Pannonia would've been unified and established by the Gepids, or Kingdom of Gepidia. The Germanic people of Pannonia are however separate from the "Germans" to their north, as their geographic separation, as well as influence from other cultures, have caused them to diverge linguistically and culturally So they're Germanic, but not German. Like how Swedes or the Dutch are Germanic, but not German.
I don't think there would've been an Abbasid Caliphate without the Umayyads having conquered Persia and parts of Central Asia as that was the base of support of the Abbasid revolution
I legitimately cannot see the caliphate conquering that much if the power controlling those regions was even remotely stable, which you imply the sassanids would be
Thanks! Worth mentioning that the Kingdom of Venetia in my video comes from the "Venedi", what the Romans called the early Slavs. Well, we don't know for sure, but it was probably early Slavs. So in my scenario it's an exonym the Romans gave them, which whatever group of Slavs that came to prominence in that region adopted with time.
So many interesting things could happen. One of the most interesting would be what happens to Russia, they adopted Orthodoxy in OTL because the Byzantines were the strongest regional power. With that no longer the case we might see them adopting Zoroastrianism or perhaps Manichaeism. With the survival of the Persian Empire it is unlikely for the Turks to adopt Islam, historically a lot of them did become Manichaean. A world split between a Manichean Slavic speaking East and a Catholic Latin speaking West would be very interesting. As to what causes the East to collapse, I think a successful Coptic Rebellion in Egypt alongside a Sassanian invasion and perhaps Visigoth and Jewish revolts while the East was under a weaker Roman Emperor could very well end the Eastern Roman Empire. As for why the West survives, the Visigoths settling in the Eastern Empire could very easily end up lessening the stress towards the West I seriously doubt the Western Empire would have the hegemony you predict though, I bet they still lose England and Germany to the Germanic invaders from Germany proper.
Cool video! I am personally somewhat skeptical that there would be much Roman presence in the Western Hemisphere if they were as technologically stagnant as you describe. In particular, I'd expect North America to be more Celtic, German, and Norse than Latin. Not a criticism at all, I enjoyed the video.
You have to take into consideration that the Arabs took advantage of Byzantium and Persia being weakened due to a recent war between them that resulted in a stalemate.
Good video, biggest thing I was thinking was that there’s no way the western Romans could realistically hold on to Brittania if they wanted to keep going
I still suspect the Western empire would give up on its South British zone of influence (at least for a while) as it served only as a money sink during the classical history era. Otherwise really interesting take on an alt history
You would think that the Magyars would conquer Pannonia because that or the Po valley, which would have been unattainable in this timeline was their goal (even the remaining Avars joined the Hungarians historically), but I guess the map just changes on the whims of the mapmaker
Some questions and comments: 1. Is baltia just a swedish empire? 2. What happen to the baltic countries if polania took them over it? 3. Did persia convert to islam or no since they were not taken over by the arabs? 4. Did the turks convert to islam due to proximity to many islamic states or no since they were passing through Zoroastrian Persia? 5. I see anglo-saxons formed. Does that mean Ænglish is the language of later Germania? Or maybe Ænglish remains more like old Ænglish from our timeline. Or would it only remain in the state/kingdom of Anglia (1600s)? I'm seeing a dominance of north sea germanic languages here (Anglia, Saxonia etc). Would Ænglish be more influenced by old Norse in this timeline? 6. Is Prussia a slavic kingdom or after german kingdoms took it over? 7. Did the germanic countries and nordics remain germanic heathens since there was no Charlemagne conquest and maybe the germanic kingdoms didn't feel the need to convert to christanity since the western roman empire was (slave driven, lower technology, and maybe not admirable to copy) 8. Completely based af for Vinland surviving and later taking over most of Canada. As a Canadian I 100% approve this 9. If germanic heathenism survived would their be any reformations or organization of the faith? Like maybe a king with enough central power to gather the realms goði and make it an axial age religon 10. Is Pannonia also a germanic kingdom/empire like Austrian empire vs German Empire? Since it was made by Gepids, Franks, and Suebes? 11. Is Thracia a Bulgarian or Greek kingdom (1600s)? 12. Would Polania/Slavics and baltics remain slavic pagans or baltic pagans since there was no push of greek orthodoxy or threat of crusades from western/central European kingdoms? 13. Wow Greek kingdom/states getting huge this timeline (1700s) 14. Which germanic kingdom would unite germania or would it be an agreement between the states due to republicanism (1600-1700s)? 15. Do Scotia and Caledonia speak latin or romance language or Irish and Scottish Gaelic/Pictish? 16. Are the kingdoms in central america, successors of the mayan/azetc empires? 17. Is the kingdom in the Andies an Inca kingdom? For the amazon kingdoms would they be latinized or native american culture? 18. I see Scania/Slesvig-Holsten is still part of Denmark, I call this a win. 19. I see Japan and China went nuts on their empire. Tbh I can see Japan being able to hold the surrounding islands and mainland shorelines Yours truly, A CK3 fan who loves playing as Asatru Denmark/North Sea Empire
I feel if the west survived and prospered, they would’ve at least been much more aggressive with mapping out Africa. Maybe not going towards the new world, but definitely traveling the coast of Africa, trying to get to the Middle East, especially with a seeming lack of a trade state like Venice who mediated the trade of spices
Part of my strategy in games around the Western Empire is consolidating forces to defend Italy and North Africa (Tunisia) plus the islands and basically expecting to lose the border lands, Gaul, Briton, and Illyria to Barbarians (I can someone hold Spain with the Pyrenees as a line). I think Western Rome could have survived it they just dialed down on keeping Italy and North Africa. I feel like the West was truly doomed once the Vandals took Carthage. If not for the Vandals, it could have continued on.
I think its good but i do think there are some issues with the scenario. It seems like the Roman empire in this scenario exists essentially in status compared to the rest of europe and I doubt there wouldnt be the occasional collapse. Further i think its certain that Britain would break off around the time of the black death to limit spread. roman north africa would probably still be conquered by the caliphates. I like the
