Roman world

[Niedel]

I once read a trilogy of alternative historical novels by Kirk Mitchell (published in the 80s, but I think they're out of print in English, I found a collection of all three in German a few years ago) that had exactly that premise. Procurator, Imperator and Liberator are the titles and the Romans are fighting "insurgents" in the middle east and later the aztecs in central America, in an alternative 1980s. Interesting stuff, a bit heavy on the action, I would have liked more philosophical content, like why things are the way they are, but still interesting.
If I remember correctly, the single event that changed history was that Pontius Pilate listened to his wife's dreams and set Jesus of Nazareth free.

[~Praetoria~]

sounds like a Christian wrote that, also it sounds interesting

[Titus Martius]

More seriously...

If Rome never fell we would have united Europe some thousand years ago. We all would speak one common language - latin. It is obvious then romans would start exploration voyages to other continents. Since romans were tolerant to other nations pacification of Americas would be smooth. Rome would became the biggest power in the world...

But all above is pure speculation with many IFs...It's very hard to imagine somethig what would change last 2000 years of history when people cannot agree on what should be done 60 years ago (to avoid WWII for example).

oh, and Titus Martius, those pics are awesome! are they from a real game?

Yes, from IMPERATOR ONLINE

[Iosephus]

Actually the Roman Empire as a political entity fell, but its culture impressed the later European cultures a lot. But I think you all know this "european cultural heredity" thing.

I think another (and maybe more interesting) questions are:
what is roman?
and
who is (was) roman?

all these two questions got a lot of aspects to go on with but I think there is no real answer!

But if anybody can give me one I would be most impressed!

[~Praetoria~]

Yes, from IMPERATOR ONLINE

oooo I might have to look into that..

Actually the Roman Empire as a political entity fell, but its culture impressed the later European cultures a lot. But I think you all know this "european cultural heredity" thing.

again, we're referring to the political entity

but all this raises another question, if the Romans survived and went to the Americas, would the Inca and Aztec have survived?

[NightHunter24]

but all this raises another question, if the Romans survived and went to the Americas, would the Inca and Aztec have survived?

Wow, very good question!...I'd say probably not just because of the technology and practicality possesed by the Roman army throughout it's history. The only weakness in the the Roman fighting machine was it''s sometimes unpreparedness to guerilla warfare....overall I'd think the Incas and Aztecs would have had their hands very full aginst the Romans. Just my opinion.

[Vincula]

if the Romans survived and went to the Americas, would the Inca and Aztec have survived?

Hmm, let's think. did Iberian culture survive? Lusitanian? helvetian? dacian? ect ect.

[Robert Vermaat]

I'm not sure. Roman legions would have nothing to conquer in the Americas. But an Industrial Age Roman Empire, with the fast ships and the logistics of 18th-c. Europe, maybe would.

On the other hand -
I think Rome, if a conquering Empire (and why would it have been - surviving need not mean all-conquering), it would have been fighting persia, and then China. Trade would have been less, and hence the need for alternative routes.
So, would the Romans ever have tried to find another sea-route to Asia, and thereby blundering into the Americas as Columbus did? Would the Vikings, now conquered Romans, ever have had the need to colonise the North and do a similar thing? Would America have been 'discovered' at all?

[Theodosius the Great]

I was going to say what you said, Valerius I doubt any expeditions would've been sent across the Atlantic.

If Rome never fell we would have united Europe some thousand years ago. We all would speak one common language - latin

Agree with the first part but not the second (necessarily). Most of Europe was already under Roman control and influence and so would've eventually completed its conquest, IMO. But one language ? What about the Greek-speaking East ? Weren't most upper-class educated Romans bi-lingual ?

If the Empire never fell, the most dramatic difference would be that North Africa and the Near East would still be Christian. No doubt, most of the world would be Christian today if Rome conquered most of Asia, parts of sub-Saharan Africa and the Americas.

What would the political structure of the Empire look like ? Would it still be ruled by one Emperor ? Would the Eastern and Western halves have reunited permanently ? Or would the Emperor be overthrown and replaced with an Oligarchy resembling the old Republic ? So many possibilities...

[~Praetoria~]

hmmm, all great thoughts

[taira1180]

With a so big territory, maybe some of the roman provinces would be quite autonomous, and try to explore the atlantic. So the different provinces of Hispania, Britania and Gallia would achieve the same result as in our timeline.

[~Praetoria~]

but under Roman rule and flags

[tlclark]

A couple of points in history.

Clovis, a frank, was awarded a triumph. Even after the "Fall" there were people who were still unaware of it. It couldn't have been that traumatic of an event.

The roots of medievalism, in dress, art, culture, politics, were laid down in the Roman Empire. Christians get blamed for the destruction of naturalism in Roman art but it was long on its way out by the arrival of the Christians.

Rome, as a pluralistic and cosmopolitan society, was very open to change. Closed societies, like China or Egypt did not. Egypt and china did persist for millennia and changed little (this is simplistic of course) but that is not true for Rome. The Romans of the 4th C. AD would be simply unrecognizable in dress language and custom to the Romans of the 2nd C. BC or even the 2nd C. AD.

That being the case, Roman society could look like anything. There's a very good chance it would look much as it does today. I imagine the language would be more latin based, our politics might be different but there's little else to suggest it might be very different.

Travis

[~Praetoria~]

Rome, as a pluralistic and cosmopolitan society, was very open to change. Closed societies, like China or Egypt did not. Egypt and china did persist for millennia and changed little (this is simplistic of course) but that is not true for Rome. The Romans of the 4th C. AD would be simply unrecognizable in dress language and custom to the Romans of the 2nd C. BC or even the 2nd C. AD.

that's one of the reasons Rome was so powerful, Rome was smart enough to take the ideas of many people. and use them to better the civilization, that works for a while, but it's hard to determine exactly which ideas are best to use, look at the U.S. we have advanced rapidly because of the many peoples that live here but now it's sort of plateau'ed

[taira1180]

Well, as in the XVII and XVIII century the political thinkers could read about the Greek and roman history with it's democracies, and they somehow used as models, maybe in alternative roman time line it would happened too. But i like to think that Europe changed because several states existed with a lot of rivalry, who promoted the need to change.
On the other hand, with the roman habit of using elements of other cultures, they would probably used the Indian feathers, or the kimono for some time...