Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Alternative History: what if?
#31
Quote:If you can find a copy, Alexander Demandt's book, "History That Never Happenend: A Treatis on the Question, What Would Have Happened If...?" is worth checking out.

(For those German speakers, it was originally published in German under the title "Ungeschenene Geschichte: Ein Traktat uber die Frage: Was ware geschehen, wenn...?")

Demandt discusses both the pros and cons of thinking this way, and then goes off and gives some examples of 'counterfactual' history and does mention Sandrus' scenario--Varus Victorious--Demandt's opinion is that Germany would have ended up Romanized, and the "Crisis of the 3rd Century" would not have happened (or have been anywhere near as bad) and likely Europe would still be ruled by Roman Emperors.

I'm curious: how does Demandt trace the crisis of the 3rd century to the presence and invasions of the German tribes?

I mean, what they made worse was a problem that was already there -- namely the tyranny of Septimius Severus and the de facto conversion of the Roman constitution from the principate to the dominate. Once Severus demonstrated that all you needed to rule was to be a knave with armies behind you, other knaves, with other armies, were clueless as to why they shouldn't rule either. And that's basically the crisis of the 3rd century in a nutshell; Germanic invasions seem to me to be subsequent and ancillary to that.
Multi viri et feminae philosophiam antiquam conservant.

James S.
Reply
#32
Wondering "what if" has fascinated many of us, that's for sure!

I am currently a member of an on-line role-playing group (RPG) called "The Republic Reborn." It is set around 109 BC and has as its premise the idea that Marius and Sulla, those two giants of the Roman Revolution, never made it to prominence. The player characters (PC's) in the game take on the role of various fictitious Roman Characters, and then carry on.

We still have the major external events which threaten Rome (such as the invasion of Cisalpine Gaul by the Cimbri/Teutones, the Jugurthine War, etc.), we still have major political and social issues to address (are we going to waive the property requirements and recruit Head Count Legions?), and the like.

The game encompasses all the major aspects of Roman life: politics, war, religion, social issues...and we put on some great bloody gladitorial contests as well!

The game is text-based, meaning that all the action comes about as a result of writing. Being a fan of Rome: Total War, I didn't think I'd like a game without stunning 3-D graphics, but you know what? IT WORKS! It's almost like writing an interactive novel together.

If you would like to check it out, visit us at one of two sites:
http://www.ancientworlds.net/aw/Group/923496
or
www.republicreborn.info (this is an informational site for the Republic Reborn. It will give you some additional background in a semi-humorous manner, and will link you to the main site.)

Anyway, you are all welcome to give us a visit!

Jim
Jim S.
Find me at Republic Reborn
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.ancientworlds.net/aw/Group/923496">http://www.ancientworlds.net/aw/Group/923496
Reply
#33
I think we should not forget that so called "barbarians", while ivading and installing, took for themselves the infrastructures and the organisations of the lands conquested.

The administration remain the same, only the political power have been changed... At least more or less.

You can see the remains in the organisation we have here in europe, (and you have also in the USA) through the university model, by exemple.

In france, the prefecture, the departements, are exemples of those remains.

Through The Church, a lot of remains stayed still and/or came back in the middle ages.


About linguistic : French and English are both verry influenced by latin. French come from latin, as Italian and Spanish does. English have a lot of structure near latin, as it have vocabulary.

I think the roman empire did not fall like a big mountain to give a plain. Its structure stays where the political power just changed of hands.

There have been cultural changes though. And political divisions, new aliances, etc.

I think if we want to think about "what if rome stayed rome", we should bend our thinking on the political side, not on the technological, organisational or military side, because barbarian proved themselves as good successors with those.
Proximus (Gregory Fleury)
Reply
#34
Dear Proximus.
I think otherwise.
I think that the presence of the "barbarians" broke up the complex economic structure of the roman world and things really did "collapse". I don't "believe" those that try to smooth out the effect of the fall of the empire and depict the "barbarians" as just taking over the power structure.

A mathematician might deny any fundamental mathematical difference between a sudden break and a smooth transformation just as he might deny any fundamental mathematical difference between a doughnut and a cup. But people that live out their mortal lives worrying about their children all while trying to drink a hot coffee know the differences too well.
Jeffery Wyss
"Si vos es non secui of solutio tunc vos es secui of preciptate."
Reply
#35
So, that's bright, but what about the remains I talked about ?

And what about, by exemple, the constructions made by the vandales in north africa, mimics of romans constructions (monastry, basilics, mosaics, Romans villas...), restaurations of roman buidlings (thermes...) at a point archeologist have sometimes difficulties to distinguish who did what ?

Al that more than 100 years, before been reconquested by East Roman Empire ?

I do not deny the importance of roman empire, nor do I deny his power and cohesion, but I think we should not deny the structure of barbarian invaded lands either. If so, we take the risk to not be objective.

And then, deny the difference between coffe and donuts.

All the references I have are in french but if you are interested, I'll give it to you.

I just can give you the names of the historians from whom I take the theories :

- E. Gibbon
- Yves Modéran
- Alessandro Barbero
Proximus (Gregory Fleury)
Reply
#36
I am reminded of a certain Star Trek episode . . .
Reply
#37
This is sort-of on topic, I guess. Wink

My wife gave me two books for Christmas: What if? and More What if?. I have only just started, but these two books seem to have a number of different "what if?" ancient history articles.

The Plague That Saved Jerusalem, 701 B.C.
The Persians Win at Salamis, 480 B.C.
The Premature Death of Alexander the Great
Romans win at Teutoburg Forest
Romans win at Adrianapolis
Socrates Dies at Delium, 424 B.C.
The Triumph of Antony and Cleopatra at Actium
Pontius Pilate Spares Jesus

I can make a new thread when I finish reading, if anyone is interested in this sort of thing.
David J. Cord
www.davidcord.com
Reply
#38
A couple of those would have drastically changed history, no doubt about it.
M. Demetrius Abicio
(David Wills)

Saepe veritas est dura.
Reply
#39
According to the Multiverse Theory, every alternative outcome to our action exists in each one of them... so that a lot of alternative universes! (And these are respected physicits who came up with this). So, all these 'what ifs' are being played out as we speak... type... read.
Arturus Uriconium
a.k.a Mak Wilson
May the horse be with you!
[url:17bayn0a]http://www.makltd.biz[/url]
Reply
#40
You mean that right now, in some other universe, I'm in the sack with Lucy Lawless and Angelina Jolie simultaneously? Cool!
Pecunia non olet
Reply
#41
No, I think its only 'possible' or 'probable' outcomes, not IMPOSSIBLE! Sorry.
Arturus Uriconium
a.k.a Mak Wilson
May the horse be with you!
[url:17bayn0a]http://www.makltd.biz[/url]
Reply


Forum Jump: