Arab-Roman Treaty of 686 holds for thirty years

[Lady Visenya]

So, the details of the treaty, what we know of them at least, made by Abd al-Malik and Justinian II are easy enough to look up. And while I think that it was unlikely that it was ever going to really hold long term, let alone in the form it had originally taken... I find myself curious.

What if it had? Holding for a full thirty years, the duration of the treaty that was negotiated between Constantine IV and the Caliph.

Would this lack of constant need to press against Roman borders leave the Caliphate freer to consolidate? Perhaps allow for a stronger Umayyad hold? Would it allow the Romans to consolidate their own hold over the Balkans?

And would it make the ensuing wars worse for both sides? Such a lull in the fighting seems interesting to me, given how it was near non-stop conflict OTL.

Note: Either this treaty or the treaty that was signed in 682. Whichever one you think works best/is more interesting.

 

[Silver01]

So, the details of the treaty, what we know of them at least, made by Abd al-Malik and Justinian II are easy enough to look up. And while I think that it was unlikely that it was ever going to really hold long term, let alone in the form it had originally taken... I find myself curious.

What if it had? Holding for a full thirty years, the duration of the treaty that was negotiated between Constantine IV and the Caliph.

Would this lack of constant need to press against Roman borders leave the Caliphate freer to consolidate? Perhaps allow for a stronger Umayyad hold? Would it allow the Romans to consolidate their own hold over the Balkans?

And would it make the ensuing wars worse for both sides? Such a lull in the fighting seems interesting to me, given how it was near non-stop conflict OTL.

it kinda of did happend Justinian II defeated the bulgars of macedonia ( the ones that moved from the avar khagante territory) and managed to subue the slavs no arab war means that sebastopolis never happens as for bulgaria the otl justinian challanged them and failed assuming his does he has chance to fail assuming he attacks in late 690s , the problem with justinian is that he was disliked by almost everyone and one bad defeat migth get him exiled .

on the other hand he migth not need to go that hard on taxess but he was receiving tribute from the caliphate justinian in the otl rushed things the slavs were not integrated and were bribed and he rellied way to much on them for the battle so waiting he might actually due restore byzantine controls in areas of the balkans and even check bulgarian expasion the treaty also delays the fall of north africa as Carthage fell in 695

the sittuation for the caliph was not well the byzantines even reconquered antioch in 688 this made the treaty of 689 which was even better than 685/686 treaty for Justinian II , the second fitna was still going on this time , we know Justinian II started hostiliies and the 20 years anarchy allowed for constant raids and the capture of africa , no 20 years anarchy would mean that if the caliphate wanted to attack they would first have to win a major victory against justinian II

 

[Silver01]

but assuming justinian doesnt get the boot and has a male child with Eudokia or still marries the daughter of the khagan of the khazars if justinian gets the boot the throne can go to his son

 

[Lady Visenya]

the sittuation for the caliph was not well the byzantines even reconquered antioch in 688 this made the treaty of 689 which was even better than 685/686 treaty for Justinian II , the second fitna was still going on this time , we know Justinian II started hostiliies and the 20 years anarchy allowed for constant raids and the capture of africa , no 20 years anarchy would mean that if the caliphate wanted to attack they would first have to win a major victory against justinian II

I mean, would Justinian II be guaranteed to live that long? His father did have serious health issues, and he himself might not make it to nearly 50 here. And with more time to consolidate, would the Caliph be able to more effectively marshal strength vs the Romans?

I'm just not sure if the longer peace might not merely be a temporary respite, allowing the Romans to make some temporary gains in the Balkans and maybe Italy but making it more difficult in the long run.

 

[Silver01]

I mean, would Justinian II be guaranteed to live that long? His father did have serious health issues, and he himself might not make it to nearly 50 here. And with more time to consolidate, would the Caliph be able to more effectively marshal strength vs the Romans?

I'm just not sure if the longer peace might not merely be a temporary respite, allowing the Romans to make some temporary gains in the Balkans and maybe Italy but making it more difficult in the long run.

we have no source of health issue for Justinian II , seems he did not inherent nothing major from his father heck we have no source of sickness putting him out commision iam sure that if anything that would kill him is an assination due to his policies.

as for the caliph it benefits him coming out of the second fitna , now depens if Al walid and Sulayman still die of ilness since Umar II was seen as a pacifist

 

[Lady Visenya]

@wcv215