been thinking about this for a while, now, and I think I've come up with something.
the death of Gaius Julius Caesar was a turning point in the affairs of Empire.
the Roman Empire never fell. stands to reason as I see it, what with the Roman salute and the attitudes as seen in MU episodes. the historys of both universes are quite similar to a degree, but there would be a divergence somewhere along the line, and I think that would've been about the mid 5th century earth MU. and because Rome never fell, it had not become a religious organisation, religions in that era of the MU being brutally suppressed. the result was that all those associated with Christianity were executed in the traditional manner of the times. those executed included the immediate familiy and closest followers of Jesus, far sooner then they were meant to be. tjhe resulting fear was so great that no one was willing to risk going underground, and so the new religion never took hold and literally died out.
between that time and the 5th century, the wars that would have ensued never occurred, atleast not as we know them. they were, instead, wars of conquest with Rome expanding its border to the north and northwest. those peoples who were overrun became the fodder for more and more legions. aby this time, the Roman Empire encompassed territory spanning from the English channel to what we know as the border with Russia at ten end of the 5th century.
it took Rome several decades to fully consolidate the territory now under its control . in that time there were a number of uprisings, which were to be expected from the conquered, and all of which were put down without mercy. it would be quite some time before any more attempts were made again.
during the 7th century a new power arose to challenge the authority of Rome. up to this time, Rome largely disregarded the nomadic peoples of the eastern deserts. while they were troublesome, they posed no real threat being disorganized as they were. then came Saladin, who sought to unite the various tribes under a single banner. after several long bloody years, these nomads were eventually defeated and absorbed into those legions they fought against. the land now claimed by Rome extended to the Persion Gulf and to the southern border of Russia in that area. there was then another period of comsolidation as the leaders of Rome took stock of the vast territory they now controlled. during all this, there was a certain amount of prosperity among those who were subjugated, though personal liberties and freedoms were nonexistant, and any dissentt was quickly quelled.
for 400 years the Roman Empire grew in strength, both militarily and economically. all alonf the eastern border with Russia there were attempts by Russias more organized armies to push back the encroaching legions. these attempts were for naught, and things remained generally the same for quite some time.
in 1066 William the Conqueror invaded the island of Britain. unyil this time, Britaim remained unmolested. it was only a matter of a few years that the inhabitants there were also brought to heel by Rome. once Europe was finally secure, Rome turned its attention to to the conrinent of Africa. as it was with the desert nomads, so it was with the various tribes of Africa who were far less capable of resisting Rome's might, and were easily dealt with. for the next few centurys relative peace was maintained within the Empires boundarys.
by the 18th century Romes power base had spread among the various countrys of Europe, but were still largely controlled from Rome. it was then decided the time had come to put an end to the trouble caused by Russia, lest it should have designs taking eastern Europe for itself. under Napoleon, and within 3 years, Roman legions had decimated Russias armies and sacking Moscow. following the final and total collapse of Russia, after a total of 7 years of fighting, another period of relative peace fell over the Empire, again with the aim of consolidating newly acquired territory.
by the mid 19th century Romes legions were again on the move. one of the few final dominos was about to fall. with the start of the Boxer Rebellion in China, the nation states in Europe, along with the United States, had sent their own armies to protect their economic interests in the region. these armies were subject to, with the exception of the US, but not directly commanded by Rome abd therefore had a certain degree of autonomy.. with the rebellion just getting underway, and put down several months later as with all attempts at rebellion. it was then decided that the eastern legions stationed along the border between Russia and China advance as far as the Great Wall, while the armies further east would advance westward to meet up with the legions of Rome.
A good point of divergence may be the reign of Emperor Pertinax. Pertinax introduced a number of reforms that would have consolidated power in the hands of the Emperors and assured a stable line of succession. Unfortunately he was assassinated 86 days into his reign and his successors revoked his reforms.
But had he lived, the Empire may not have fallen after all.
There's more then just the Roman Empire falling or not thats different. Even two thousand years ago when Rome was around people weren't that cruel and down right evil. In the MU everyone just seems to be missing any part of the good half of humanity. Of course if all the humans in the MU took after the Roman emperors (or some of them at least) then I guess their personalities would be right. Either way the Romans were fairly civilized and the MU is not.
In my opinion the MU is probably the way it is because the modern religions and some of the "dead" ones never took hold and become widly held. Now some people are going to argue that all religion has done is cause wars, violence, death, blah blah blah I've heard it before and I grant you some very terrible things have been done in the name of religion before. But 99% of people of faith dont go around starting wars and killing people they use it as a moral and ethical guide and compass for there lives.
Now while that alone may not be enough to create a world where everyone is evil (as most that don't have a religion still have ethical guidelines and won't go around killing people), combine it with a world ruled by an empire and daily life is the strong surviving and the weak perishing well that might just be enough to do it.
Anyway sorry for rambling just figured I'd throw my two denarii into the conversation.
Even two thousand years ago when Rome was around people weren't that cruel and down right evil.
Yeah, people were downright sweet to each other 2000 years ago. Let's see, gladiatorial games and feeding people to large predators in arenas in front of crowds who wanted to see people get mamed and killed, slave labor, crucifixions, the complete destruction of civilizations (Carthaginians) and nations (Israel) - and that's just a lil bit o' Rome, never mind the civilizations in the same era in other parts of the world and what they were up to.
It is my opinion that the only bad guys Trek ever did right were the Borg.
As much as I love the Romulans I have to say that when the writers for Trek try to do the writing for bad guys they always come off as as forced in the opposite direction as possible from the Federation, and this forced feeling remains so obvious in almost all the dialogue from any baddy we ever see in the series. The Mirror Universe makes this disgustingly obvious, painfully so.
Basically what I am saying is I loath the MU, it just felt so stupid and it went from a one episode plot point to an ever constant obsession of the writers and some fans. I just don't get it.
just added a bit more, for those interested. I decided to not identify any emporers, as they seemed to have changed every other week, but the were largely the same, atleast up to Justinian. there's more to add, later since I worked overnight and had time to come up with what was added. some historical figures will be mentioned to try and set the right context...hopefully. comments already made, and those forthcoming, are appreciated, provided they are constructive.
as for Pertinax, I've not heard of him or when he lived. too tired to google that. anyway, in the MU he very likely would have lived longer than 86 days, and ensuring a line of succession as suggested above
just added a bit more, for those interested. I decided to not identify any emporers, as they seemed to have changed every other week, but the were largely the same, atleast up to Justinian.
Justian was an Easter Roman (Byzantine) Emperor! Now the Byzantine Empire is a pretty cool subject to study in itself, but I think you might be getting your empires confused. Unless you meant the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire never fell, which as it evolved was an entirely different animal then the classical Roman Empire.
Furthermore the Byzantine Empire was largely supplanted by the Caliphate, the Abbasid and Fatimid Empires, and later the Ottoman Empire, among various other successor states, lasting in one form or another until 1453.
Oh, but I could go on and on about this for hours...
Edit, in your overall story there are a number of historical...inconsistencies.
1. A better turning point would have been the Battle of Teutoburg Forest. Gaius Julius Caesar spent most of his 'reign' fighting various other rebels. 'Imperial' rule was not consolidated until August assumed the 'throne'.
History is usually like a slow meandering river. Change happens slowly and events steadily build. Other times, things happen rapidly. Sweeping changes in doctrine, policy, culture, and leadership can occur almost overnight. The Battle of the Teutoburg Forest was one of the latter. Three legions, plus supporting troops numbering 30,000-40,000 strong crossed into Germania in 9 AD. Less then 10 percent would return. They were ambushed by the German warlord Arminius/Hermann and so thoroughly defeated that Rome never again considered another cross-Rhine advance. After this, the borders of the Roman Empire stayed fairly consistant until the Fourth century AD when things began going down the drain.
2. Roman prosecution of Jesus and his followers in the early days of Christianity would have been both politically unfeasible and unlikely. At the time, Christianity was considered another sect of Judaism. At the time, Jews living across the Roman Empire may have made up as much as 10-15% of the population of the Empire. As such, the Romans did not wish to antagonize the Jewish populations if at all possible.
The Romans viewed the Christian Heresy as a purely internal religious affair to be decided by the leaders of Judaism. It was only when Christians began a program of cultural and political resistance to Rome that they began being persecuted.
Furthermore, shortly after the Crucifixion, Judea rose up in revolt against the Romans. This revolt lasted quite a while and was instrumental in spreading Christianity out of Judea as many refugees fled the rebellion and resulting military actions taking their at the heretical Jewish faith with them. They settled in Jewish communities across the Empire, spreading their heresy far from the controlling hands of the Jewish religious leaders in Jerusalem.
3. The Romans didn't usually trust newly conquered people to fight for them until much later in their history. The bulk of their armies consisted of legionnaires drawn from the Roman freemen and 'alae' legions, consisting of conquered peoples who had been somewhat 'Romanized' whose service would confer citizenship.
4. The Romans had conquered England and Wales (not Scotland or Ireland) by 43 AD.
5. Saladin did come come about until the 12th century. Furthermore Eastern Roman expansion had been blocked by the mighty Parthian and later Sassanid Empires.
6. William the Conqueror was a Norman, who were descended from Vikings (William's grandfather was Rollo, the Norwegian warlord who conquered Normandy).
7. Rome had conquered a large portion of North Africa even before 1 AD. Further expansion was extremely difficult up until the 20th century due to primarily disease but also a lack of infrastructure and inclement terrain in the region.
8. Last bit doesn't make much sense at all. Does Rome control Europe or not? Or it kinda like today with Christianity except instead of a Pope there is an Emperor?
The Deeds of Robert Guiscard says that he "though now only a young man, already shows courage worthy of an adult."
The Guiscards were Noble Normans That brought their Knights under Roger I to Expand Dominion for Chrisdom as Pope Urban II s Blessing to under Roger II Establish primacy over the Moorish nobles and then grab Naples. They married well as The Mother married Baldwin I of Jerusalem That ascended as First King there. Teh Control first established by Richard I Of England's Grandfather.. yes that was a french house.
William Duke of Normande drug my Mothers ancestors on one side and another to cross that channel and drive north to the Scot Pict Boarders.. Bur.. they married Scots..
Yea the Franks.. Well Rome did extend beyond its grasp but was far more cohesive due t its ability to maintain large cities whereas the Germanic peoples of the North Eastern areas[Prussian] were unable to sanitize and populate in one place were varied feudal chieftains and not unified Germany until Brandenburg's in late 1800's .. 1850's Fathers Clan was still a Principality independent and aligned to keep the Hapsburg's out. Hapsburg's that Lead the Defence of Wien to keep the Ottoman Turks out of Europa after the Turks and Toppled the Greeks of Constantinople [Byzantium/ Byzantine was a later term for them" ] the turks that were nomands in the eastern steppes were driven to tuyrke by KHAN!
So 6 ways to Kevin Bacon geopolitical style.. Eastern Empire was true to the old culture of Rome health and baths and Alexander in part held the old text and libraries of antiquity. Rome when from1 million some to lower thousands as the aqueducts were "Vandalized" and not until the 1800s started gaining population stability.. Italy After Romes Latin Emperors didn even have a unified Language until recent times.