- Pronouns
- he/him
Discuss this new article by @heraclius here
-
Hi Guest!
The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
An Alternate History of the Roman Empire: The Later Severans
- Thread starter Gary Oswald
- Start date
- Pronouns
- he/him
This is an interesting series.
Alright, so alt-history ‘wanks’ are generally pilloried, and it is a ghastly term. But what I like about this series of events is that no one living through them would think it was a golden age.
The Severans will nevertheless make the list of the Good Emperors. The campaigns are inconclusive, hardly part of the great Roman roll of glory. But the empire stands.
And yet, we know that the Empire is doing far better. It’s a fine line to tread, and you’re doing well so far.
Alright, so alt-history ‘wanks’ are generally pilloried, and it is a ghastly term. But what I like about this series of events is that no one living through them would think it was a golden age.
The Severans will nevertheless make the list of the Good Emperors. The campaigns are inconclusive, hardly part of the great Roman roll of glory. But the empire stands.
And yet, we know that the Empire is doing far better. It’s a fine line to tread, and you’re doing well so far.
Last edited:
- Location
- Derbyshire
Yeah its quite clear that the Nerva-Antonine-Severan-Gordian period will be seen as a coherent epoch of unbroken stability in later historiography.
The interesting thing will be what the defining end of that epoch.
The interesting thing will be what the defining end of that epoch.
If I can comit the faux pas of quoting myself from a thread in the Old CountryThis is an interesting series.
Alright, so alt-history ‘wanks’ are generally pilloried, and it is a ghastly term. But what I like about this series of events is that no one living through them would think it was a golden age.
The Severans will nevertheless make the list of the Good Emperors. The campaigns are inconclusive, hardly part of the great Roman roll of glory.
And yet, we know that the Empire is doing far better. It’s a fine line to tread, and you’re doing well so far.
As in many cases, the term originally meant 'egregiously overpowered, to the point of farce'. Now, it just means 'doing better than OTL'. Not only is it a dreadful term, it's conflation into the latter term means many 'does slightly better' TLs are now faced with being labelled 'wanks', however thoughtful and interesting they are.Geordie said:I do think that this site overuses the term "wank".
"Doing better than OTL" shouldn't equal "wank". Scotland surviving as independent past 1603 isn't a Scotwank. All it needs is Elizabeth of England to have a kid, or for Edward VI to survive long enough to get an heir or two. Taking that PoD to have Scottish aircraft carriers patrolling an Empire the size of OTL's British Empire in the twentieth century? That's a wank. Another example: Italy avoiding the Second World War might have been able to turn Libya into the projected Fourth Shore. That's an improvement, a stronger Italy. Italy building a New Roman Empire like in some Hearts of Iron game, stretching from Portugal to Syria? That's a wank.
heraclius
Well-known member
- Location
- New Forest, Hampshire, England, UK
One overall thing to remember for my portrayal of the third century crisis is that the same sort of problems recur as in reality, but not to the same extent due to a few crucial 'tweaks' en route. The Severans, for example, have a better start as Septimius Severus - a fascinating ruler, as a sort of less 'savvy' or PR-conscious equivalent of Vespasian or Trajan who restores order after a civil war but lacks the bonhomie or patience at creating a public image acceptable to the Rome elite - is the legit adopted heir of the previous ruler not a usurper. Caracalla does not get a chance to reveal his full potential, and Elagabalus is butterflied out of the picture; Alexander Severus has a better start and better support but still is too weak or gauche to tackle the emerging German or Sassanid problems ruthlessly enough.
We will see the disastrous 250s simultaneous invasions in East (Persia) and West (Rhine/ Danube) diminished by Rome having more troops and resources and no problems on the middle Danube, but still occurring ; and the persecution of the Christians is also less prolonged and intense as Decius's career (he started the persecution as Emperor in 249-51 in OTL) takes a different trajectory. Some emperors will get a better chance to do more of what we can see from OTL events that they intended to do; others won't. I will keep an eye on reminding people of the real timeline as we proceed; in my own case the trajectory has been familiar to me since getting Gibbon's 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' as a birthday present as a teenager. Not quite the usual birthday present at my run-of-the-mill 1970s state school, and one I had to keep quiet about!
We will see the disastrous 250s simultaneous invasions in East (Persia) and West (Rhine/ Danube) diminished by Rome having more troops and resources and no problems on the middle Danube, but still occurring ; and the persecution of the Christians is also less prolonged and intense as Decius's career (he started the persecution as Emperor in 249-51 in OTL) takes a different trajectory. Some emperors will get a better chance to do more of what we can see from OTL events that they intended to do; others won't. I will keep an eye on reminding people of the real timeline as we proceed; in my own case the trajectory has been familiar to me since getting Gibbon's 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' as a birthday present as a teenager. Not quite the usual birthday present at my run-of-the-mill 1970s state school, and one I had to keep quiet about!
TR1996
Well-known member
- Location
- Adelaide, South Australia
Wouldn't the daughters of Geta and Alexander marry well, and potentially have husbands pursuing their claim to the throne?
heraclius
Well-known member
- Location
- New Forest, Hampshire, England, UK
Possibly later in the century, though by that time the Severan link would be a matter of 'old news' as so many other emperors had intervened. But Geta was only born in 189, so any daughters of his by Praefect Papinian's daughter would be in their teens at most when he died in my TL around 228. Alexander Severus was born around 208 and came to the throne in reality in 222 aged 13 or 14, and married in 225, to the daughter of his ambitious Praetorian Praefect (who hsi mother then got rid of for trying to be made co-emperor). If he had not been Emperor until Geta died he might still have been unmarried until his accession; in any case his daughter(s) would be under-age until the early 240s.
In the hard political world of the 240s and 250s, a general with an army behind him was much likelier to gain power by force and then be reluctantly accepted by the senate than a legit son-in-law to inherit the throne peacefully and have the provincial commanders accept it. The soldiers did have a sentimental loyalty to the notion of an Imperial Family and its right to the succession of a relative ahead of outsiders though, as seen by the successful plan by Julia Domna (Septimius' wife)' s sister Maesa to overthrow Caracalla's nondynastic replacement Macrinus by pretending that her elder daughter Soaemias' son Elagabalus was really the illegit son of Caracalla who had seduced his cousin. Later in the century we have the master-creator of bureaucratic govt and would-be stability, Diocletian, setting up a system of each Emperor (one in the West, one in the East) nominating his successor , in his lifetime, as the 'best man available' (not always a relative) and making him deputy emperor ('Caesar') and giving him a 'trial' period commanding some provinces to check that he could do the job. The latter would then take over when the senior Emperor (the 'Augustus') retired. It was meant to be foolproof and stop coups - but the soldiers often preferred to see a son or nephew succeed an Emperor to an outsider, and excluded and resentful sons of past Emperors could use this to stage a coup - hence the rise of Constantine the Great, as son of the late Emperor of the West Constantius ( deputy Emp 293-305, senior Emp 305-6, died at York) in 306 ff to wreck Diocletian's system. Even a smart operator and methodical planner like Diocletian could not beat human nature.
In the hard political world of the 240s and 250s, a general with an army behind him was much likelier to gain power by force and then be reluctantly accepted by the senate than a legit son-in-law to inherit the throne peacefully and have the provincial commanders accept it. The soldiers did have a sentimental loyalty to the notion of an Imperial Family and its right to the succession of a relative ahead of outsiders though, as seen by the successful plan by Julia Domna (Septimius' wife)' s sister Maesa to overthrow Caracalla's nondynastic replacement Macrinus by pretending that her elder daughter Soaemias' son Elagabalus was really the illegit son of Caracalla who had seduced his cousin. Later in the century we have the master-creator of bureaucratic govt and would-be stability, Diocletian, setting up a system of each Emperor (one in the West, one in the East) nominating his successor , in his lifetime, as the 'best man available' (not always a relative) and making him deputy emperor ('Caesar') and giving him a 'trial' period commanding some provinces to check that he could do the job. The latter would then take over when the senior Emperor (the 'Augustus') retired. It was meant to be foolproof and stop coups - but the soldiers often preferred to see a son or nephew succeed an Emperor to an outsider, and excluded and resentful sons of past Emperors could use this to stage a coup - hence the rise of Constantine the Great, as son of the late Emperor of the West Constantius ( deputy Emp 293-305, senior Emp 305-6, died at York) in 306 ff to wreck Diocletian's system. Even a smart operator and methodical planner like Diocletian could not beat human nature.