What if Rome never fell? | Alternate History

Just to be clear, this is fiction. I fully realize that this scenario is not my most realistic one. And it is more about the world building, as well as being a fun thought experiment, than actually predicting what would've happened.

I don’t think Rome would adopt feudalism simply because feudalism developed as a result of the collapse of Rome. Europe became war ravaged and very dangerous and so banding under a social hierarchy was necessary. With Rome still around I can’t see that happening.

Your alternate history videos are so much better than any other channel's. You show detail by detail and every border change and describe what happens to said territory even after its lost. Very nice video!

Hmm, this timeline sounds suspiciously familiar.

This was well thought out. I look forward to more such videos.

Losing Egypt/Africa would be a lot more critical, that's where all the food was. And Slavs were a germanic tribe that popped up around the 4th century. Celts separated from Britain because Britain wasn't protected by romans. I don't see whats stopping romans from simply invading England/bretonia. Also you have to consider Civil war.

It would more "realistic" to have Rome completely break apart for no more than century and later reunite, much like China. A bit as if the Franks (or another german warband) did not split, kept conquering and unified with Byzantium.

great video as always

I love this! Please keep creating more worldbuilding videos 😀 Subscribed

Glad you did a collab with Mr Z. Great content, sad you're not massive yet.

You need more subs!! You videos have awesome quality

Here's an idea that's somewhat related to this one: What if Rome never invaded Dacia?The point of departure would be during Caesar's Civil war with either Burebista deciding not to send Akornion to Pompey and remaining neutral in the civil war which could open up later diplomatic options for Rome and not sour relations at all,or with Burebista deciding that Caesar would be the better ally and sending Akornion to Caesar instead of Pompey to create an alliance and fight on his side,resulting in Dacia gaining some goodwill with Rome and Burebista possibly also the extra bit of loyalty from his nobles from the successful fighting in Rome,which could be just enough to keep them from assasinating him. On the short term this wouldn't change too much as Caesar would still be assasinated,though his plans after the civil war would probably be changed so that instead of fighting Dacia and then going to Persia to fight them as well to use the Dacians that are now his allies in some way or another,with the only real important change being that Dacia would instead of becoming an enemy of Rome become an ally of Rome which without Dacia collapsing from Burebista's assasination would likely continue to be allies in the future as well,at least for a while. In the long term however this could have an extremely major butterfly effect because Dacia would instead of just being a speed bump be more like a brick wall to migratory tribes as they wouldn't be genocided by the romans later on decimating their population ,instead still remaining a tightly packed wall of people who thought themselves immortal who were renowned for their capabilities in battle,making for a pretty hard to pierce wall which could very well save Rome from a lot of the problems it had irl with migratory tribes as many of the big ones came from the east and attacked through Dacia which in this timeline would if not outright stop them thin them down to a level Rome could deal with much more easily. This would result in a timeline where instead of just Rome there are 2 major powers in Europe,with Rome's border actually likely being helped tremendously by Dacia due to it if it wouldn't have broken up during Burebista's rule taking up a good majority of Rome's european border,from western Austria all the way to the Black sea. This would take a lot of pressure off the Romans if they could maintain good relations with the Dacians,especially since it's unlikely after the massive expansion the Dacians had during Burebista's rule to expand much more,at most only taken parts of south-western ukraine and the Bosporan kingdom over before stopping completely to start trying to centralize and possibly change the ethnic map of europe rather drastically.

correction: Ceaser was never appointed emperor in OTL he was merely given the title of dictator, Augustus created the Roman Empire.

I can't wait for part 2!

Nice! As always :)

Vlaedimirvs Paevtin President/Governor of Rvssia.

If North Africa stayed catholic?

a touch unrealistic, but ok. rome wasn't this unstoppable power, if they hadn't done anything about internal rot, the romans would've still collapsed or remained a loose federation with rampant corruption and an overall declining vibe, rome relied on conquest to get new slaves, not conquering anything for so many years wouldn't be good. the original caliphate used light cavalry, and the romans used heavy infantry, the light cavalry can just harass their infantry and run away, keep exhausting them, theres no way the romans can defend against the caliphate, sure they could slow them down but north aafrica would still be conquered by the caliphate also, the roman trade routes would have already been blocked by the caliphate, since most trade routes were over land and the ones over sea would require them to cross the red sea, which is controlled by the caliphate, losing egypt would just mean losing a huge grain supply to the roman empire, it wouldnt cause them to try and search for some mysterious continent the vikings had rumours about. i do not believe that the romans would've taken any interest into the americas, since the vikings managed to keep canada a relative secret from outsiders for all those centuries, rome, ravaged by famines caused by not having egypt would be stuck dealing with internal chaos instead of trying to search for america, even more unlikely is the romans having large colonies in the caribbean but not in the fertile plains of the rust belt, even IF the romans had gone and searched for the americas, they would go through the north, as thats what the vikings would have told them, the romans were not very focused on navy and were more of a land force, they would not have had established small colonies in africa. yet again, its the same as the caliphate with the mongols but even more effective, the mongols can just keep charging in shooting their arrows and then charging out, the roman heavy infantry is helpless against them due to cavalry archers just being too op.

Having Rome turn feudal is a clever choice, it feels like an incredibly obvious thing now.

Nice video