290: King Carausias of Britain

[Aznavour]

So, half-way through Diocletian’s reign/reform of the Roman Empire, a Roman Naval commander by the name of Caurasias rose in revolt, took over Britain and northern Gaul, declared himself emperor and minted a lot of coin. (Like, so many coins you guys, it was a thing)

Anyhow, IOTL he was eventually booted out by tetrarch Constantius Clorus and ultimately murdered by one of his subordinates by 296.

But what if he had managed to hold on to Britain and become a First King/Founding Father of sorts?

Dacia had just been abandoned some 20 years before on the grounds of it being an indefensible waste of money, so why not Britain?

Could Carausian Britain survive for long or would it descend into wardlordism as soon as its founder dies? Or perhaps succumb under the strain of wars and foreign invasions.

 

[Charles EP M.]

If his power is based on the Roman legions and foreign mercenaries, it's surely going to depend on if he/his successors can replace them with local-born soldiers or the Caurasiasian Empire is going to remain dependent on bringing in foreigners & whether he has the loot to do so. I'd guess if he/his successor pulls that off, you're going to see a weird-to-us nation that's still making pretences at being Roman Ruled even though the elites are increasingly celts and the culture's a merger.

 

[Ricardolindo]

If the Romans are unable to retake it:
1. Britain would certainly remain Pagan for longer.
2. I'm unsure whether the Anglo-Saxons would still migrate there.