A Middle-West Kingdom

[Ephraim Ben Raphael]

How would it be possible to make Europe develop more like China did, with one large empire controlling much of the mainland that keeps being successively resurrected every hundred years or so when it collapses?

Maybe if Alexander went west and conquered OTL Italy, Spain, France and Germany? He could do sort of what Qin Shi Huang did by imposing the Greek script and measurements on people who largely lacked both, opening the way for unity and a continued empire. Thoughts?

 

[Saepe Fidelis]

How would it be possible to make Europe develop more like China did, with one large empire controlling much of the mainland that keeps being successively resurrected every hundred years or so when it collapses?

Maybe if Alexander went west and conquered OTL Italy, Spain, France and Germany? He could do sort of what Qin Shi Huang did by imposing the Greek script and measurements on people who largely lacked both, opening the way for unity and a continued empire. Thoughts?

One word repeated against and again and again:
Rome! Rome! Rome! Rome!
They already had most of Europe- just have them conquer Germany etc. and we're done!

 

[Jaded_Railman]

One word repeated against and again and again:
Rome! Rome! Rome! Rome!
They already had most of Europe- just have them conquer Germany etc. and we're done!

Rome is probably the major reason why Europe evolved separate. After all, from the most removed point of view, Europe did spend most of its history under one power: Catholicism. Christendom. That kind of thing. It was made up of many little political units but one religion unit. The break-down of that religious unit is basically the story of European history from Charlemagne onward. Hell, it's the story of European history from Theodosius onward.

The problem is Rome wasn't exactly a European civilization, at least in the sense that Germany is a European civilization. At the time of antiquity, Europe was split between two different 'cultural spheres', the Mediterranean and the North European Plain. The Mediterranean was dominated by Greeks and Pheonicians at first but then Rome later. The North European Plain, on the other hand, was Celtic, almost to a T (while Germanics and Slavs still lived in the area, the dominant civilization was Celtic). As long as the center of imperial power lay outside the dominant cultural sphere, Europe could never stay united in the long term.

Key to united Europe kind of like China would be preventing the snuffing of Gallic civilization in its cradle by Caesar. Gallic civilization was better adapted to surviving on the North European Plain and even thriving. One cliche in 'surviving Rome' TLs is the invention of the heavy moldboard plow to aid in farming the touch Northern European soil. The problem is: Why would the Romans do this?. The majority of the wealthy and economic activity in the Roman Empire was in the Mediterranean, and their contemporary farming package was finely suited for Mediterranean agriculture. What little farming was done on the North European Plain, in its tough soil, was large scale plantation agriculture, something not exactly conducive to technical innovation.

The Celtic Gauls, on the other hand, lived in the area. The focus of a hypothetical Gallic Empire would be on expansion eastwards across the Plain, instead of eastwards towards Persia. In all honesty I've always been of the opinion that in no realistic timeline could the Roman Empire be brought to the Dniester/Vistula border people seem obsessed with, and thus it could never survive in the long term because of the threatening external populations living in modern day north Germany and Poland. A Celtic Empire based out of Gaul, on the other hand, could achieve such a border and survive in the long term.

And, of course, when gunpowder is finally invented, at some point in the timeline, it'll be descendants of Celts and Celticized Slavs rapidly moving east across Russia, the Urals, and Siberia, instead of Russians.

Imagine that, a polity that stretches from the British Isles to the Pacific. Scary.

 

[Lysandros Aikiedes]

Being Mediterraean-based economies, Rome and the Greek states had a stronger political focus toward the east. They were between continents, as they were situated between them in logistical terms. Perhaps, had the take-over of Gaul had more like that of Greece, then certain technological practices would have been more readily adapted by the Romans. Some people think that the "Gallic Reaper" was a Roman invention, yet they don't seem to have used it much themselves. Slave-labour was cheaper.

On the cultural scale, the Gauls were becoming more urban since the Third Century BCE. The Arverni tribe of modern Auvergne were said to have come pretty close to uniting the immediate country, if it had not have been for a war with Rome in the 120's BCE, which resulted in the vassalization of the Allobroges and the Arecomici, as well as the seizure of modern Provence. The Gauls had advanced farming, extensive mining operations, and an impressive road system. They also had a common belief-system and priesthood, and an advanced body of laws, albeit memorized rather than written, even though this was well within their ability to do.

They were truly a civilising force in northern Europe. Its too bad few people know this.


A second possible unifying culture of Iron Age Europe would be the Dacians in modern Romania. They too were highly urbanized, with paved roads, extensive mining and farming, and even piped water. Before their complete destruction by the Roman Emperor Trajan in 106 CE, they even practiced a Henotheist/Monotheistic religion based on the teachings of a man they named Zalmoxis. This religion was controlled by a very organised and powerful priesthood.

For my money, the Celtic peoples, being more numerous and widespread, are probably more likely than the Dacians to have influenced the course of European civilization if Roman hadn't made the grade.

 

[Germaniac]

Ive been writing a rough outline of what I hope is a non-ASB way to create a Roman Empire that will eventually take hold of all Europe, up to the Volga. First Germania is pacified (and made into several protectorates first then annexation) This Empire will substantially change over the course of the Third Century Crisis and the dominate will not develop the way it did. This new Roman Empire which emerges from the chaos will become one that becomes very much like China with several Dynastic changes and absorption and romanization of invaders, much like china.

Basically this Roman Empire goes through periods of Stagnation and development, much like China. This Empire will also be much more able to protect from ouside threats

China developed a Plough which was suitable for Northern Europe Centuries before and more solid contact between the two could help. But, thats not really plausable.

 

[Monty Burns]

I think the major difference between Rome and Chine is surrounding civilization. At the beginning, Rome had Carthage, an equivalent enemy. Then Rome expanded into the Greek cultural sphere, where it had a culturally superior (at the time) enemy, and in some Greek states equivalent enemies again. And finally, Rome never succeeded in conquering Persia, which again was an equivalent enemy, both militarily and culturally. And even if Rome would conquer Persia, they'D meet another equivalent enemy in India. Compared to that, China was for the most part of its history confronted with enemies which might be militarily superior, as many nomadic tribes were, but which would quickly adopt Chinese culture once they conquered China and assimilate into it. Which is exactly what happened to those northern European tribes/cultures Rome conquered, but which never occured in the eastern mediterranean.

So what about Carthago surviving and some eastern Greek empires surviving, resulting in a balance of powers around the mediterranean which allows Rome only to expand into northern Europe?

 

[Faeelin]

What about a surviving Carolignian Empire?

 

[Monty Burns]

What about a surviving Carolignian Empire?

I think that the cultural division within the Empire which led to the partition into the Eastern and Western Frankish empires is inevitable - unless you choose a pretty early POD before the carolingian/merowingian empire even formed.

Apart from that, what Jaded_Railman wrote about the Gauls would apply here as well: Carolingian empire is a northern empire, fit to conquer and settle all of northern europe and project power into the mediterranean basin.

There's however the same problem as with Rome: Unlike China, the Carolingian empire will have strong enemies: Arabs, Muslim Spain, Pope (?), Byzantinians...