So instead of splitting Rome into two equal sized halves, it would have been better if Rome was divided into many parts...

So instead of splitting Rome into two equal sized halves, it would have been better if Rome was divided into many parts, one big one that includes both Rome and Constantinople, and several small Romes.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonine_Plague
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plague_of_Cyprian
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_of_the_Third_Century
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Why
And how does this stop them trying to unite each other

fuck off Diocletian

not enough gravitas or majesty.

My idea
Universal emperor in italy
Everyone has to listen to him no matyer what
Western roman empire
Gaul/iberia/ england
Souther roman empire
All of africa
Eastern roman empire
Balkans/anatolia/middle east

>thinly veiled tetrarchy thread
I know how that ended up

5 independent kings with one universal emperor in italy that the other five have to give taxes and levies, in exchange he makes sure no one attacks each other

How would the emperor ensure no one attacks each other?

Just go back to being a republic and clone how the US works

Obviously the empire would have the greatest military out of everyone else and takes enough taxes and levies to keep the others weak

5 kings is still too powerful though, it should be balkanized like the HRE

the main empire should be Italian peninsula + Balkans so the strongest army can defend the Danube

the Northern empire will be Gaul and Britania which would guard the northern limit and the Rhine

the Western empire will be ruled from Iberia and Africa all the way to Carthage and patrol for raiders from the desert, procuring to explore down the west of Africa for resources

the Southern empire will be based off Alexandria and control Egypt, Judea and establish safe trade down the red sea and out of Ethiopia into the Indic sea

the Eastern empire will be ruled from Palmyra and control Syria and Anatolia, and be dedicated exclusively to preserving Armenia and fighting off the Sassanids

>southern empire exploring the indian sea
>finds arabia
>starts mass importing camals
>wester empire starts using camals to go down into the sahara
>massive roman influence established in africa and arabia/ india
>souther empire becomes a navy with a state, making sure the profitable indian ocean is kept under roamn control and organizing """""""pirate raids""""""" on the persian fleet that would form after indian ocean trade becomes an actual thing
>western empire is their to make sure that the saharans know whos boss and to explore africa
>constant vietnam style wars in europe against forest niggers
>constant fighting with persians as the eastern empire makes sure the southern empire is safe and that the silk road is secure
Im giving myself a boner

>attila brings the northern and universal empire to their knees but is ultimatlu defeated
>the empire still falls apart due to the autonomy of the 4 empires
>thh northern empire thinks that its pulling the weight of the empire by defending againts the forestniggers and defeating the huns
>the western empire thinks its pulling the weight of the empire because of the security they bring to the trans med trade and the trans saharan trade
>the southern empire thinks its pulling the weight of the empire by bringing the riches of the indian trade to rome
>the eastern empire thinks its pulling the weight by keeping the persians from the roman heart lands and keeping the silk road secured
>because of this they all thought the roman emperor was a joke who actually was not that important
>when the huns invaded and most of the empires did not answer the call to help, seeing it as a threat to the northern rabbhunsonly the western empire answered the call to defend rome, losing their british lands to invading norse men during the invasion
>when the war had ended, the roman emperor decreed that all who did not answer the call to defend the empire must be brought to the emperor to give their reasoning
>no one came to rome
>The four empires seceeded from rome, leaving the roman empire with only the mmeesl italian holdings when compared to the roaring lion that was the old roman empire

*rabble
*>only the northern empire
Fucking phine posting

ok but here's the question: how the fuck do you stop ambitious men from fucking over the empire with civil wars? rome has been divided no less than twice and both times it didn't really work out and one can argue that the way the division was handled by theodosius set the western administration up to fail.

you can chop up the empire however you want but its the human aspect of the empire administration you fail to address

Ambitious men would fuck rome no matter what
Look at the republic and early empire

The fall of Rome was not only an inevitable event, but it was positive.

The Indian sea trade would be key to defeating the Persians by completely bypassing the silk road, tanking their income. Like the discovery of America it would totally shift the balance.

>Ambitious men would fuck rome no matter what
Basically this. The reason the Republic was so successful was that it was basically a system designed entirely to mediate conflicts between ambitious men/families and allow them to direct their energies outwards rather than against other Romans.

Dividing the Empire into even more partitions would accomplish nothing because it does nothing to address the underlying weaknesses it had.

What happened to Charlemagne's empire after he died?

Rome died with Julian, everything after was Roman in name only.

With marvellous cabbages!

Like this?

Rome died with Cato the Elder. Everything else was simply redecorated degenerate Greek culture.

>Southern Empire
The romans were well aware of arabia. They even failed to conquer it once due to conspiring guides who lead them through an extremely harsh route. Instead they turned it into a sort of south-eastern germany i.e kept the locals divided and used them as a great source of auxillary soldiers and border guards/raiders. The Sassanids did the same which lead to some pretty neat cold war-style shenanigans and greater raids into eachother's territories. All in all arabia was a vital part of the roman defense against the persians.

Dromedary were already a common sight in the east so no need to import any.

There's no way Rome would be able to control the indian ocean trade. It's just too vast and remote for them to monopolize.

Oh and as the romans didn't turn into a naval focused state after starting and holding on to their conquest of the mediterraenean I doubt that they would any scenario. The roman empire was always a land empire even though it relied on 'Mare nostrum' to unite its realm. Just changing the relevant sea wouldn't change that deeply ingrained cultural preference.

By that point Rome, the city, was meaningless. It only had about 10,000 residents and was not even the big city in its part of the Empire.

Where did they all go?

A lot of them died.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonine_Plague
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plague_of_Cyprian

TLDR: two major plagues with deaths mostly being in the core areas of the Empire, like Rome itself. Add to this a lot of civil wars.

Many of those that did not die moved to safer lands. Be it north eastern cities in Italy with good walls, or north Africa, Egypt, or central Gaul.

By the Division of the Empire Rome was a urban waste land that every build that could be turned into a fort had being turned into a fort. A sad fate for a city that peaked at 1.4 million residents

Interesting, but i find it hard to fathom how the city could just empty like that.

Where did all the old aristocratic families go?

Ravenna and Milan for those that wanted to move into another big city. Some moved their homes to out of the way easily defended places. Venice was already a thing but was only a small village till a number of old money families moved there in the early 4th century as a example of what I am talking about.

>Interesting, but i find it hard to fathom how the city could just empty like that.

It happened over about a 155 years, not over night. Having said that the time frame of 220 AD to 270 AD is were most of the population loss happened.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_of_the_Third_Century

That touches on what was going on in the wider empire during that time frame.

Yes because that worked so well during the Middle Ages, with castille breaking free eventually
Then they unite to overthrow the current emperor in exchange for one who will give them greater autonomy, this happens all the times in elective monarchies with uppity nobles

Diocletian's reforms with setting up independent governors was pretty good considering how chaotic the empire's administration was before.

But the empire should have never been split,to four, three or even two parts, it set a very bad precedent of dynasts claiming their own territory and inevitably clashing with each other or the emperor, and creating a lot of civil wars. A better idea would be to keep the Diocletian regional governors and civil administration, and setup a smoother succession system akin to that of the 5 Good Emperors.

>Venice was already a thing but was only a small village till a number of old money families moved there in the early 4th century as a example of what I am talking about.
Those families moved into the coastal towns like Eraclea, Metamauco, Torcellum and Ammiana user, which were the founding members of the confederation of venetian (as in the region) towns that would go on to become the byzantine district/duchy Venetikà/Venetia and establish the city of Venice proper in place of the small (but strategically placed) fishing village of Rivoalto in 821.

Much of the nobility abandoned the cities for a self sufficient life in the country side if I'm not mistaken.
Alot of the old families died out aswell.

My idea is to make it somewhat more feudal but with Emperor as top dog. Make Senate somewhat like anglo parlament.
Create kings and military kingdoms like Rex of Gallia, Rex of Britannia, Rex of Hispania etc.
Make Sol Invictus/Mithraism a main religion with Emperor as an regent of God and clergy which will control kingdoms autism.

Rome still had something like 800,000 people when Theodosius divided the empire, what are you talking about?

they simply should have copied the US constitution, works like a charm

Rome should just have been from Italy to turkey and along the danube