Nereas, to punish punish peasants more efficiently.
EDIT: to clarify, I'm not saying Nereas is badly written or unrealistic. I just don't like him as a person.
Last edited:
An Age of Miracles III: The Romans Endure
- Thread starter Basileus444
- Start date
EDIT: to clarify, I'm not saying Nereas is badly written or unrealistic. I just don't like him as a person.
I don't recall it ever specified what it is, and it's been around for a few centuries by now. I always thought it was some kind of short sword best for hacking, like a machete.
Er here are some early references from the first thread. Pretty sure the French revolutionary references indicate a guillotine.
An Age of Miracles: The Revival of Rhomanion
Compared to the Baltic, the North Sea provides more maneuvering room for Russian ships, and obviously the Russians don't know the EAN is coming. Jews do well in the Ottoman Empire, Roman Empire, Al-Andalus, and Arles. Non-Roman Italy is the same as OTL, whilst Germany is a very good candidate...
www.alternatehistory.com
An Age of Miracles: The Revival of Rhomanion
A United Scandinavia continues to co-elesque and Rhomania takes a turn for the worse - interesting developments!
www.alternatehistory.com
But terror always works so well and never causes any blowback...(sarcasm)
I think a big part of the problem was that while the war hawks had some legitimate concerns (how to protect the Roman Empire in a hostile world), many are extremists who want rampant aggressive expansionism. It's hard to address reasonable concerns with people's whose only solutions for those concerns are wildly radical. And the extremists tend to crowd out and out-shout more moderate voices.
Long Knife/Guillotine: The Long Knife is the TTL version of the guillotine.
Rhomania's General Crisis, Part 13.1: The Killing Fields, Part 2
Rhomania’s General Crisis, part 13.2-The Killing Fields, Part 2:
Coastal Thrakesia, between Pergamon and Smyrna, May 30, 1662:
The sounds and noises of an army encampment surrounded Andronikos Gyranos as he dismounted, handing his reins to an Athanatoi dekarchos. Behind him, two of his Akoimetoi aides did likewise. From here, everything seemed normal. Men marched and drilled, swearing and sweating as they repaired kit, tended to animals, cooked food, and did all the other miscellaneous tasks that a mobile city required. The air was a mix of sweat, manure, vinegary wine, and a tang of gunpowder.
Gyranos missed Constantinople.
What had not been normal was what Gyranos had seen on his way here. The Akoimetoi were unloading on the coast, although they weren’t ready to move inland where Nereas was encamped with his appreciably-larger army. Gyranos had ridden on ahead to speak to his colleague, although Plytos’s letters, dispatched by fast courier, should have already reached Nereas.
They did not seem to have made a difference. The Akoimetoi had landed north of Smyrna, because landing any closer to the city would’ve been too dangerous for the guard tagma. Some of Nereas’s cavalry scouts had raided near Smyrna, but hardly with enough force to tie down the garrison, which Gyranos expected was getting stronger by the day. Baghdad should’ve been a clear warning not to underestimate, at least in mass, the danger of enthusiastic townspeople fighting behind barricades for their homes. Should have been.
Gyranos had seen clear evidence of what had been delaying the march on Smyrna during the ride up from the coast. At a prominent crossroad, where a stand of trees stood, probably planted to provide shade for weary travelers, hung bodies. There had been ten, bloating in the summer sun, making identification impossible, but two were of a size that suggested they were either unusually petite women or older children.
He stormed into the command tent, immediately spotting Nereas. The Strategos of the Varangians was seated opposite the entrance at one of the standard-issue breakdown tables, dictating to an aide. Nereas looked up at Gyranos when he entered and then looked at the aide. “We’ll finish this up later, Markos,” Nereas said, dismissing the aide with his hand; the aide promptly left the tent.
“I was wondering when you’d show up,” Nereas continued now that the two were alone. “I’ve been expecting you for some time.”
“I’m sure of that. I’m also sure that you’ve gotten Plytos’s letters that I sent on ahead.”
“Of course.”
“Then why are you here?”
“I understand his concerns. They cannot be dismissed lightly. But as field commander, I have a better awareness and understanding of the situation and am acting according to my judgment. It would be dangerous to advance on Smyrna without properly securing lines of approach and supply. Unfortunately, the sentiments of the population are not as they should be and it is taking considerable effort and time to adjust them, I admit.”
“There is also the risk that Smyrna will become a nest of hornets if left alone too long, and this whole operation was launched on the premise of taking the area before eastern reinforcements could arrive.”
“I agree, but fortunately your arrival means that is no longer an issue.”
Gyranos’s eyes narrowed. “How so?”
“Baghdad is the obvious case study for this campaign, but the situations are not the same. The disaster was based on two factors, the quick arrival of Ottoman regulars to stiffen the Baghdadi, and the ability of the second relief column to come up behind and surprise the expedition. My efforts at securing lines of approach ensure that the second factor will not come into play, while the Akoimetoi can deploy as a blocking force to ensure that the first factor will not.”
“Or you could just advance on Smyrna now with full force, and just cut the Gordian knot and get it over with. And with the fall of Smyrna, much of the resistance in the countryside will likely end of its own accord.”
“They have already acted as traitors. You would let them go just because they no longer have the opportunity to act on it?”
“Most are just peasants protecting their crops.”
“Their crops are needed for the war effort. They are duty-bound to provide it.”
“And the children?”
“What of them? Their families know what they must do, and know the price of failing to do their duty.”
Something in Gyranos snapped. “WE ARE OFFICIERS OF THE ROMAN ARMY! WE DO NOT MAKE WAR ON CHILDREN!”
“This is not war; this is survival. You know what kind of fruit this land brings forth.”
“What are you talking about?”
“This is Thrakesia. The Venetians let a ten-year-old boy live, and for that mistake, they are now dust. We are fighting for the survival of the Roman Empire. Nothing can stand in the way of that, nothing.”
There was a brief pause and then Nereas spoke again. “You know what your problem is?”
“What is my problem, according to you?”
“You have knowledge, but lack wisdom. You have great intelligence and organizational ability; your logistical plans are testimony to that. But you lack vision. You care too much about Romans, and not enough about Rhomania.”
“I hardly consider that a vice, and even if it is, the reverse is far more common, and dangerous.”
“You would say that, and that shows the problem. The loss of a few lives, or one life, may be regrettable, but they are nothing in comparison to the preservation of a two-thousand-year-old Empire.”
Gyranos opened his mouth to respond but then he noted the ‘one life’. “You killed Ioannes, didn’t you?”
Nereas smiled, a very thin and faint smile. He’d dropped the hint, Gyranos had caught it, and then taken the train of thought to its end. “Yes.”
“Because it was politically necessary, even though he was innocent,” Gyranos sneered.
“Precisely.”
“And that’s why Athena settled for blowing up Arules, rather than continuing to argue for either you or Plytos. Because he’s the one that actually did the deed, and somehow she figured it out.”
“While you lack the stomach for what needs to be done, as I said, you do have an impressive mind. You are completely correct. And you know what follows from this.”
Gyranos’s stomach twisted. He knew better than Nereas what Siderid fury looked like; he knew what Demetrios III had ordered to be done in the Pit when he was utterly enraged. He had no wish for himself, or Irene, to find out if the granddaughter, with a murdered brother and murdered mother, took after her grandfather. “That we, including myself, are committed. There is no going back.”
“Now you’re seeing the picture properly. So, here’s what is going to happen. You will deploy the Akoimetoi into eastern Thrakesia to block any potential reinforcement from Syria. I will issue orders to ensure suitable roads are cleared for your use so that there aren’t any traffic jams when you cross my line of march. Meanwhile, I will reduce Smyrna…and the countryside.”
Gyranos didn’t respond. “I am the senior Strategos,” Nereas continued. “And I command a more senior guard tagma. Meaning that I am in command here.”
Gyranos grinded his teeth. Nereas was right, of course, and appealing to Plytos’s letters wouldn’t work, even though Plytos outranked Nereas in the same way Nereas outranked Gyranos. The letters were recommendations and advice, not orders; Plytos was too familiar with military strategy to be crass enough to try and micro-manage a field commander from a distance of a few hundred kilometers. “Yes, you are. Sir.”
“Good, now that that is settled.” Nereas rang a bell, a different aide appearing in the tent flap immediately. “Please see that the Strategos and his aides are given a hot meal before they depart. And notify Timothy to start drawing up a traffic plan to enable the Akoimetoi to cross our line of march without congestion.” The aide saluted and disappeared. Nereas looked at Gyranos. “I’ll have that plan delivered to you as soon as possible. Enjoy your lunch. Dismissed.” Gyranos resisted the urge to snarl, saluting instead, and left.
Outside the tent, Gyranos’s eyes alighted on one of the sentries and his kit; a thought flashed through his mind, of grabbing a grenade, lighting it, and hurling it into the tent he’d just left. It lasted only a fraction of a moment, and then he dismissed it.
The odds of him successfully seizing the grenade and sparking the fuse, without any ready ignition source of his own, before being seized were quite long. And even if he got that far, the canvas tent would not contain the blast while the table Nereas was behind was good cover. And even if he did get Nereas, there would be repercussions, for himself of course, but that was not what really worried him.
It was repercussions for Irene, who was staying in Constantinople for ‘security reasons’, and that he would not accept. He would not risk her for all the jewels of Vijayanagar. And while it may be wrong morally, he would not risk her for all the children of Thrakesia either.
Still, it was a nice thought.
Now this short of starts to look like "a pox on both your houses " situation. We have someone unwilling to switch sides out of fear of what Sophia would do to him. That's the place I'd have the lower classes be pissed off enough to s5art a republican revolution, but we short of know that's not in the original plans.
So they aren't so overconfident that they have no fear of betrayal. It's sad to see Irene left behind, but we do know they've been discussing contingencies. Let's hope an escape plan exists and will be executed soon.
I've just caught up on the last few years of this wonderful TL over the last couple days (and revisited some earlier sections as well). Getting back into the TL that prompted me to join AH in the first place feels like a homecoming-and it feels very weird to read old comments from a much younger me.
I love this current arc, and really appreciate how this TL has added narrative and historical depth as it goes along (indeed, this current crisis couldn't have been written a few years ago, with its explicit focus on early modern economics and the limits of state power). As always, I salute @Basileus444 for sustaining an incredible TL, and keeping the narrative boiling and the readership excited as Rhomania and her world changes.
My comments may be kinda scattered chronologically, as is probably inevitable after reading five decades' worth of stuff in less than five days.
I honestly think that having the Tourmarches be arrayed against "selfish profiteers" or even acting as (less systematic) versions of Gyranos with his vision of strengthening Roman society as a whole, rather than being aligned with the emergent business elite against the interests of the peasantry in the cause of "efficiency", could also have been a good narrative choice (maybe adding in some moral complexity if desired, as well as conjuring shades of 1930s Japanese militarist rhetoric) but this way also works well.
I know that Basileus has said, both in the comments and basically in the TL itself, that Rhomania squandered a brief but real window for European hegemony in the wake of the War of Rhoman Succession. But what if they did act more wisely, but without aiming at outright domination? In hindsight, if Demetrios had, in 1634, recognized his financial and political limitations, made peace with the HRE after perhaps a few token raids, and generally embraced by choice the same European diplomatic position he was forced into by circumstances a few years later, how much of an effect would this have had on European opinion? Could he have gained some more concrete concessions, like a better position in Italy, or keeping Arles more friendly to Constantinople? Would it have even been politically possible to make such a "mild" peace-or would it have just made the hawks explode into prominence earlier, and maybe in a more ugly way?
In your opinion, could a "soft-sell" conversion approach have worked for the Syrian Muslims, leading to their gradual conversion and fusion into the Roman body politic, like their Anatolian counterparts, if it hadn't been forestalled by Andreas Niketas' needing to curry favor with the Church, the Nullification Acts, and then a series of escalating rebellions and repressions? Or did the demographic statistics, the deeper roots of Syrian Islam, and other issues make that idea impracticable in any case? This question has an additional significance in light of the Great Crime and all.
On that note, with the Syrian Muslims ethnically cleansed and any hope of their acquiescence to Rhoman rule, or Rhoman need of it, eliminated-is the Mad Empress undergoing a positive historical reassessment in certain circles? Perhaps as "the first Roman ruler to recognize these implacable enemies for what they are" or something like that.
In the War of the Tourmarches, is the regime leaning into the Timurid vs. Ottoman angle? Herakleios seems altogether too passive to care about it on a personal level, and Timur's legacy is one of both evil (from the Rhoman POV) and ultimate defeat.
In all the discussion about "what is it that binds the Despotates to Rhomania, and how can that model be improved?" it seems that the dynastic factor is often underestimated. Egypt and Sicily are ruled by imperial offshoots, and the Alessi of Carthage have been confirmed Romanophiles since the days of Demetrios Megas. Obviously, I'm not excluding the other factors (a religious history with ties to Constantinople but without full allegiance to Orthodoxy, putative identification with some sort of supra-Rhoman cultural thing, a delicate balance of autonomy, mutual interest, and influence-though Egypt's equilibrium just got massively altered-), but it seems like something worth thinking about. Also ties into a neat irony-Russia, Prussia, Arles, Mexico, and even Lombardy have been ruled by Roman-origin dynasties (plus "Andreas" of Hungary in the last century and Theodor Wittelsbach in this one pressing claims on Rhomania), but Vlachia, Serbia, and Georgia (the states that could most plausibly be converted from Roman allies to Roman Despotates or the like) have never been.
I recall that the Shimazu are also "scheduled" to have a crisis soon-I wonder if some claimant to the old Imperial line will play a part in it? I know the old Emperors got pretty firmly extirpated a few decades ago when the Shimazu first established their dominance over Japan, and there's something to be said for having such a striking contrast between OTL and TTL. Still, an institution with a millennium of history behind it shouldn't be dislodged that easily, IMO, at least not without a few last gasps.
Looking forward to seeing what comes next. It's good to be back.
I love this current arc, and really appreciate how this TL has added narrative and historical depth as it goes along (indeed, this current crisis couldn't have been written a few years ago, with its explicit focus on early modern economics and the limits of state power). As always, I salute @Basileus444 for sustaining an incredible TL, and keeping the narrative boiling and the readership excited as Rhomania and her world changes.
My comments may be kinda scattered chronologically, as is probably inevitable after reading five decades' worth of stuff in less than five days.
I honestly think that having the Tourmarches be arrayed against "selfish profiteers" or even acting as (less systematic) versions of Gyranos with his vision of strengthening Roman society as a whole, rather than being aligned with the emergent business elite against the interests of the peasantry in the cause of "efficiency", could also have been a good narrative choice (maybe adding in some moral complexity if desired, as well as conjuring shades of 1930s Japanese militarist rhetoric) but this way also works well.
I know that Basileus has said, both in the comments and basically in the TL itself, that Rhomania squandered a brief but real window for European hegemony in the wake of the War of Rhoman Succession. But what if they did act more wisely, but without aiming at outright domination? In hindsight, if Demetrios had, in 1634, recognized his financial and political limitations, made peace with the HRE after perhaps a few token raids, and generally embraced by choice the same European diplomatic position he was forced into by circumstances a few years later, how much of an effect would this have had on European opinion? Could he have gained some more concrete concessions, like a better position in Italy, or keeping Arles more friendly to Constantinople? Would it have even been politically possible to make such a "mild" peace-or would it have just made the hawks explode into prominence earlier, and maybe in a more ugly way?
In your opinion, could a "soft-sell" conversion approach have worked for the Syrian Muslims, leading to their gradual conversion and fusion into the Roman body politic, like their Anatolian counterparts, if it hadn't been forestalled by Andreas Niketas' needing to curry favor with the Church, the Nullification Acts, and then a series of escalating rebellions and repressions? Or did the demographic statistics, the deeper roots of Syrian Islam, and other issues make that idea impracticable in any case? This question has an additional significance in light of the Great Crime and all.
On that note, with the Syrian Muslims ethnically cleansed and any hope of their acquiescence to Rhoman rule, or Rhoman need of it, eliminated-is the Mad Empress undergoing a positive historical reassessment in certain circles? Perhaps as "the first Roman ruler to recognize these implacable enemies for what they are" or something like that.
In the War of the Tourmarches, is the regime leaning into the Timurid vs. Ottoman angle? Herakleios seems altogether too passive to care about it on a personal level, and Timur's legacy is one of both evil (from the Rhoman POV) and ultimate defeat.
In all the discussion about "what is it that binds the Despotates to Rhomania, and how can that model be improved?" it seems that the dynastic factor is often underestimated. Egypt and Sicily are ruled by imperial offshoots, and the Alessi of Carthage have been confirmed Romanophiles since the days of Demetrios Megas. Obviously, I'm not excluding the other factors (a religious history with ties to Constantinople but without full allegiance to Orthodoxy, putative identification with some sort of supra-Rhoman cultural thing, a delicate balance of autonomy, mutual interest, and influence-though Egypt's equilibrium just got massively altered-), but it seems like something worth thinking about. Also ties into a neat irony-Russia, Prussia, Arles, Mexico, and even Lombardy have been ruled by Roman-origin dynasties (plus "Andreas" of Hungary in the last century and Theodor Wittelsbach in this one pressing claims on Rhomania), but Vlachia, Serbia, and Georgia (the states that could most plausibly be converted from Roman allies to Roman Despotates or the like) have never been.
I recall that the Shimazu are also "scheduled" to have a crisis soon-I wonder if some claimant to the old Imperial line will play a part in it? I know the old Emperors got pretty firmly extirpated a few decades ago when the Shimazu first established their dominance over Japan, and there's something to be said for having such a striking contrast between OTL and TTL. Still, an institution with a millennium of history behind it shouldn't be dislodged that easily, IMO, at least not without a few last gasps.
Looking forward to seeing what comes next. It's good to be back.
Last edited:
Their fear is starting to show, funny how it escapes in fits of brutality and anger. Well not funny "ha-ha" but funny "my uncle is way too drunk to be at this wedding, who is he going to insult next?" Type train wreck. Just with more dead peasants and a weaker Rome.
I think Nereas is accurate in analyzing Gyranos as 'having the brains but not the stomach', just in a different context. There will be reforms coming, but they'll be from Sophia's camp in upcoming updates. And Gyranos's arc isn't finished.
Yup. But then Nereas is consciously meant to be a character who frankly would fit in rather too well in our 1930s.
Thank you. The narrative writing is certainly harder and more time-consuming than the history book content, but when I can pull off high-quality forms of it, I really enjoy it. While this whole period is a miserable train-wreck for Rhomania (it's not called Rhomania's General Crisis for nothing, although I took the term from OTL), Gyranos's arc greatly interests me and is my favorite part. That part has grown appreciably from the original outline, where he was little more than the organizational brain of the Tourmarches.
I think Demetrios might have been able to get at least a bigger sphere of influence in Italy, with less anti-Roman suspicion in Arles and Spain, if the Romans had played their cards better earlier, but these could only get pushed so far. Expansion even by a friendly power gets scary if said expansion gets too big and close; the fuzziness comes from defining 'big' and 'close'. But it is also true that that might have sparked an earlier and bigger war hawk backlash, since the fruits would still seem paltry, and this time the Roman government isn't even trying.
I'm unsure if a soft-sell approach to Syrian Muslims would've gone better. The Romans would still want the Muslims to convert, and Islam in Syria in 1500 had significantly deeper roots than Islam in Anatolia in 1300. A soft-sell would be more easily resisted, while a hard-sell quickly turns ugly for obvious reasons. Plus, there's always the concern about Syrian Muslims being more loyal to co-religionists in rival Muslim empires than to Orthodox Constantinople. Note that Christians in the Ottoman Empire were viewed with greater suspicion as Christian powers became more and more of a threat to the Ottoman Empire. Perhaps if the Romans conquered Syria, but Iraq and Iran remained fragmented minor states that were absolutely no threat to Roman authority in the region, so that the Romans feel more secure from the start and stay that way. As for the Mad Empress, I admit I hadn't thought of her. One rethink though might be along these lines: The Mad Empress wasn't really mad; she was a moron. Because only an idiot stirs up a hornets' nest with no plan with how to deal with the nest, and that's what she did.
The Constantinople regime isn't leaning into a Timurids vs. Ottoman angle. They are using alleged foreign connections with Sophia to try and discredit her, because clearly only traitors in cahoots with foreigners would rebel against our plans to ensure the safety and prestige of the Roman Empire...
Looking at medieval and early modern European history, personally I think the dynastic solidarity factor is rather overrated myself. And at least in future centuries, with the decline of monarchial authority, it will become even less. I'd argue that the European royal dynasties were the most intertwined in 1914, but look what happened then...
The Shimazu crisis is going to be absolutely mixed up with the old regime of Japan trying to overthrow the Shimazu and turn back the clock. I really wish I knew more about Japan so I could do this story justice but looking at my molehill of knowledge in the shadow of my mountain of ignorance, I feel I can't do much more than 'yes, this is happening, and here's the end result, but I'm not qualified to do the details'.
Fear leads to anger... (Yes, I know it comes from Star Wars, but in 100% seriousness I think that statement is a very valid one philosophically.)
Every time I think about Timurids ruling Constantinople I chuckle, like imagine establishing one of the most powerful Muslim empires only for the descendants to rule one of the most powerful Christian ones.
Evilprodigy
Donor
Why not ask for a review or outsource this section? I think you did something like this with another part of the TL at some point a few years ago.
My prediction is that Gyranos will flip sides but only after Irene is (somehow) safe out of Contantinople. Besides this, I don't see him surviving this whole mess...
Last edited:
From this update it sounds like he'd see that as just a change in who's holding her hostage. It would be enough to buy his cooperation but not his goodwill.
Thanks for the detailed response!
Yeah, makes sense that Rome could maybe have gotten a better overall outcome but the same structural factors limiting Roman influence and power (both hard and soft) would still apply.
A very good point about how fears of a Syrian Muslim fifth column are much more alarming considering the Ottomans are right next door and (unlike in Anatolia) Syria is farther away from any Constantinopolitan response. Interesting nuance about the Mad Empress, I think as a character her being psychologically damaged by losing all her family and then falling under that monk's influence works so well that it'd be a pity to discard her "madness", but it would make sone sense if internal TTL historiography is shifting to emphasize your alternate interpretation.
And same about the nature of Tourmarchic propaganda.
I honestly think that dynastic factors are, if anything, slightly underrated (more specifically, I think people tend to see too much of a watershed at 1648, and think that things just switched from a dynastic and religious model of international affairs to one of Westphalian states bumping into each other, even though the former factors still held a lot of weight even in the early 18th century). But it's a spectrum that people can reasonably disagree on-and I really shouldn't be surprised that you don't think too highly of the dynastic factor, considering we just had a war defined by Theodor running up against the limited and incommensurable nature of the dynastic principle ITTL.
(As an aside, in my mind the reason European dynasties were all so highly interconnected by 1914 was itself a sign of how little they meant-since royal marriages were prestigious and all but no longer determined your foreign policy, they became a way to improve relations with another country at basically no cost).
Very fair, and I echo @Evilprodigy's suggestion to at least consult with someone to get yourself up to speed. I'm sure you'll find a good solution in any case.
Last edited: