What If the Roman Empire NEVER Fell

The year is 410 A.D. The Visigoths, led by Alaric I, have breached the walls of Rome. The tribe has pillaged, looted, and burned its way through the Eternal City, leaving devastation behind. The first sacking of the Roman capital in 800 years severely weakened the once-unstoppable force that was the Roman Empire. With the Roman military scattered, corruption running rampant, and the deposition of Romulus Augustus, the Roman Empire was on the road to collapse some 60 years later, never to recover again. But what if all of this never happened?

We don’t mean just the Sacking of Rome but all the internal strife and political corruption that plagued the Roman Empire, causing it to crumble in 476 A.D. In other words, what would the world—and the Empire itself—look like if the Roman Empire never fell? Of course, we’re not the first to pose this intriguing question, and we certainly won’t be the last. Historians and scholars have pondered this hypothetical scenario for years, exploring what could’ve transpired if the mighty Roman Empire had endured beyond the fifth century. That’s why it’s not surprising that there are virtually endless speculations surrounding the alternate fate of the Roman Empire.

The Empire itself has significantly contributed to this number of theories, as there were numerous times—and ways—in which it could’ve turned itself around. That’s not to mention the abundance of theories on what led to Rome’s collapse in the first place. However, examining this vast array of theories within a single video might not be a good idea. Well, at least not if we don’t want this video to last longer than the actual decline of the Roman Empire. So, we’ll embrace a single course of alternative history in which the Roman Empire managed to resolve its internal issues before the shadows of destruction could fully engulf its glory.

But remember, we’re dealing with the butterfly effect here. A small change could derail the rest of this hypothetical history in unimaginable ways. So, this video won’t focus on a play-by-play recounting of an alternative history in which the Roman Empire never fell as much as it will explore the broader implications and potential ripple effects of such a scenario. No matter which school of thought you subscribe to, one thing’s certain – the course of history would’ve been dramatically different if the Roman Empire had not fallen. If this Empire were still standing, it would undoubtedly shape the future of Europe and the rest of the world in numerous ways.

But before delving into these ways, we must go back to the beginning. After all, only by understanding why the Roman Empire fell can we hope to unravel the threads of an alternate history where it stood resilient. The fall of the Roman Empire is a multifaceted tale shaped by economic decline, military challenges, political turbulence, and social transformations. However, this monumental event can also be linked to specific moves made by inept emperors.

First up on this unfortunate list – Tiberius. Tiberius Julius Caesar Augustus was the second Roman Emperor, ruling from 14 to 37 A.D. Tiberius made a fatal mistake, one that would ultimately bring the entire Roman Empire down, both East and West. He failed to crush and subjugate the Germanic tribes to the north. During Tiberius’s rule, the Empire also witnessed the emergence of the first major conspiracies against the Emperor and his heirs, particularly under the watchful eye of the Prefect of the Praetorian Guard, Sejanus.

While initially intended to serve as the Emperor’s elite protectors, the Praetorian Guard evolved into a potent political force under Sejanus’s guidance. Eventually, this elite unit would wield more influence over the Emperor than he had over them. At best, this led to the formation of what would today be referred to as a shadow government. At worst, it irrevocably undermined the stability of the Roman Empire. One of the most significant ways the Praetorian Guard affected the future of the Roman Empire was by frequently interfering with imperial succession.

And if you know anything about the Roman Empire, you know what a huge problem succession posed for this mighty civilization. In fact, many people single out unstable succession as one of the key factors in the decline. But this is far from the only reason that brought down this ancient powerhouse. Another crucial element in unraveling the Roman Empire was rampant corruption within its political and administrative structures.

And where there’s corruption, there’s Nero. Nero—or Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, to be precise—is the second Emperor on our list whose egregious actions ultimately contributed to the fall of the Roman Empire. Of course, his actions during his 14-year rule generally exemplify the destructive impact of unchecked power, so it shouldn’t be surprising that he’s on this list. Let’s not sugarcoat it – Nero did a lot of horrible things. But the one that dearly cost the Roman Empire was wasting extravagant amounts of money on useless mega-projects.

That’s why when the Great Fire of Rome broke out on July 18, 64 A.D., the city’s treasury was ill-prepared to handle the crisis. Nero initially imposed tributes on the Roman provinces to compensate for the financial shortfall he himself had caused, but to no avail. There was still not enough money. So, what did Nero do? He began minting more coins, ultimately ruining the Roman Empire’s currency. This move marked the beginning of a terrible pattern in which Emperors would chip away at the value of Roman coins whenever they strayed even slightly from their budgetary constraints.

In their minds, it was only a matter of time before new land was conquered, leading to an influx of wealth. But in reality, they created an endless cycle of inflation that was one of the most prominent causes of the so-called Crisis of the Third Century, when the Roman Empire nearly collapsed for the first time. Coincidentally, this move by Nero was also primarily responsible for the shortcomings of the third Emperor on our list – Caracalla. Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, better known as Caracalla, ruled the Roman Empire from 198 to 217 A.D.

During his rule, the constant inflation sowed the seeds of unrest among the Roman soldiers, as they demanded higher pay to cope with the increasing cost of living. Trying to please the soldiers—and ultimately fix the Roman economy—Caracalla granted Roman citizenship to all free men living in Roman land. The goal was to increase the taxable population and give the economy a much-needed boost. However, the only thing this move accomplished in the long term was limiting the size of the Roman military.

But how is this even possible? How did we get from Point A, a new source of tax revenue, to Point B, a less powerful Roman military? Here’s how. Before Caracalla’s Constitutio Antoniniana in 212 A.D., people could only become Roman citizens by serving in the military for 25 years. After their service, they were granted citizenship as a reward. This meant they could vote in elections, own land, travel freely within the Roman Empire, and even be immune to specific local laws. Given these and many other benefits of Roman citizenship, it shouldn’t be surprising that people typically became fiercely loyal to the Roman Empire, answering every call to defend it.

After Caracalla’s decision, things took a 180-degree turn. After all, why serve in the military and risk your life on the battlefield when you can acquire Roman citizenship without lifting a finger? It’s safe to say the Roman military never recovered afterward. To put this into perspective, let’s compare the numbers of the Roman military before and after Constitutio Antoniniana. For instance, for the Battle of Cape Ecnomus in 256 B.C., during the First Punic War, the then-Roman Republic successfully mobilized a fleet of approximately 330 ships with 140,000 soldiers and crew. At the time, the Roman Republic had a population of 5 to 7 million.

Fast forward to the rule of Constantine I in the fourth century A.D. The entire standing military of the Roman Empire was approximately 650,000. This figure might not seem so bad until you learn that the population of Rome was around 55 million people at the time. But it gets even worse. For the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains in 451 A.D., when arguably the last great Roman victory took place, the Empire barely managed to muster up an army of around 30,000, and not all of them were even Romans. Sure, this army managed to fight off Attila’s hordes, but the pitiful number of soldiers fighting for Rome underscored the dwindling might of the once unstoppable military.

Still, the Roman victory in this battle goes to show that the Roman Empire and its army outclassed its Barbarian adversaries by a great margin, even toward the end. However, it simply ran out of soldiers to fight off these tribes indefinitely. And with that, we arrive at the fall of the Roman Empire. Now that you understand what led to this historic event let’s discuss how Rome could’ve been saved.

This is where many theories diverge, as possibilities for saving the Roman Empire presented themselves virtually every decade. Here are two popular but highly unrealistic what-if scenarios. Some scholars believe that if Emperor Valentinian I, who fiercely opposed the Germanic tribes, hadn’t died from a sudden stroke in 375 A.D., he would’ve stopped his brother Valens from inviting the Goths into the Roman Empire in 376 A.D. Valens’s goal was to use these Goths as troops. But as virtually any Emperor’s plan this video discusses, this one also failed, as the Goths turned against the Romans.

Others claim that if Emperor Majorian’s fifth-century expedition to North Africa to drive the Vandals from Carthage wasn’t sabotaged, the Roman Empire would’ve secured a massive source of wealth, allowing it to rebound economically in a few decades. But as mentioned, this video won’t examine a singular event and how it might’ve changed history. Instead, it will explore what would’ve happened if Rome’s primary issues had been resolved before its decline.

So, in our alternative history, Germanicus is allowed to continue his conquest of Germania, eventually assimilating it into the Roman Empire. This move would’ve also shortened Rome’s border, making it more defensible and alleviating some external pressures. In addition, in our timeline, Sejanus never comes to power, meaning the Praetorian Guard remains loyal to the Emperor. With this, the Roman Empire is given the chance to develop a stable succession, avoiding the political turmoil that often accompanies power transitions.

But that’s not the only change made to improve the institution of the Emperor. One of the greatest issues Rome had was that too much power was concentrated in the hands of the Emperor. This also meant that one person had to carry the burden of making decisions that could profoundly impact an entire empire. After all, you know what they say, “With great power comes great responsibility.” But this responsibility was often too much to bear for many Emperors, leading them to make risky or deeply flawed decisions.

So, in our reality, joint rule has been established early on, allowing two Emperors to share the governance responsibilities. But these are not just any Emperors. In this new reality, Rome is guided exclusively by the best of the best, not those solely interested in benefiting the Praetorian Guard. This means that Caligula and Claudius would probably never have become Emperors because, let’s face it – they only came to power in the absence of better alternatives.

Other notable changes to the history of the Roman Empire include establishing a presence on Britannia much sooner, in the absence of any fears for its own lands. This would’ve allowed Rome to control its maritime trade routes more effectively, enhancing the Empire’s economic strength and strategic influence. This is a notable change for one reason. In reality, it took Rome quite a long time to invade Britannia, allowing the British tribes to become a more formidable opponent. This eventually halted the Roman expansion deeper into the island.

So, in our reality, the Roman Empire has successfully conquered Germania and Britannia. Next up? Dacia and Parthia. Let’s say we’re currently in the second century A.D. In an effort to expand its eastern borders, the Roman Empire subjugated Dacia and crushed the Parthians in an epic battle. The success of Rome in this regard can be explained by two factors – its increasing stability and Parthian’s growing instability. After all, thanks to the joint rule, our Roman Empire no longer has to worry about the governance of its wide-reaching lands. While one Emperor is focused on these lands, the other stays at home, preventing any chances of a disruption of power.

But let’s go back to Parthia. With this ancient land conquered, our Roman Empire has established greater trade connections with the East. On the one hand, these connections brought numerous exotic goods and Eastern philosophies to the Empire, enriching Roman society. On the other, the Empire gets the chance to return the favor, so to speak, and spread its own culture into Asia. But this newly established connection to Asia doesn’t exclusively serve as a pathway for positive exchanges. It also becomes a potential route for the transmission of Eastern plagues.

Now, don’t get us wrong – these plagues reached the Empire either way. Just take the Antonine Plague of 165 to 180 A.D. as an example. But in our reality, they would probably have reached it several decades sooner, potentially affecting more people and spreading further across the Empire. But even this could’ve been a blessing in disguise for our Roman Empire. The Antonine Plague might’ve encouraged the Empire to tighten its Eastern border in Asia to stop it from spreading. The affected groups could’ve also turned to Rome for aid, allowing it to build a mighty fortress along the Eastern frontier in return.

However, these solidified defenses would eventually help the Roman Empire keep the Scythian, Indian, and Iranian raiders away. Unfortunately, the plagues aren’t the only threats to the alternative Roman Empire. In fact, if the Roman Empire had continued to exist, it would’ve experienced a whole host of internal and external threats, including invading armies. The Empire’s first significant test would likely occur during the fourth century A.D., as the Huns emerged as a formidable force on the Eastern frontier. The conflict between the Roman Empire and the Huns would not be an easy victory for either side. It would probably have lasted for at least 50 years but eventually resulted in hundreds of thousands of Huns dead at the hands of the Roman legions.

Another great threat would probably arrive in the seventh century A.D. as the Muslim caliphates gained strength and expanded their influence. However, this threat would likely be swiftly dealt with, halting Muslim expansion into Roman territories. Though this probably wouldn’t have been the last of the Muslim attacks on Rome, the Empire could likely adapt and effectively counter each future incursion.

Of course, this would also severely impact the spread of Islam in the world. Historically, Islam emerged in the seventh century A.D. and rapidly spread across the Arabian Peninsula and beyond. Had the Roman Empire still been standing at this point, its presence could’ve significantly influenced the trajectory of Islam’s spread. At best, the spread of this religion would’ve been limited, potentially leading to a more localized influence. At worst, Islam would’ve been almost completely wiped out in the Roman Empire as Christianity became the official religion.

However, this doesn’t mean Islam wouldn’t have spread worldwide in our alternate reality. Though regions like Levant, Syria, Mesopotamia, and North Africa would likely remain influenced by the Roman Empire religion-wise, Islam would find its way into Persia, India, and central Eurasia. In fact, this religion might’ve even spread further if the Roman Empire had never fallen, as the Muslim caliphates would have directed all their resources toward an eastward expansion. The only event that could’ve stopped this expansion was the rise of the Mongol Empire in the early 13th century. This empire, led by Genghis Khan, would likely suppress many Islamic practices, as it did in reality.

As for the successors of Genghis Khan, they could’ve gone either way, really. They could’ve embraced some Islamic practices as they spent more time in the Islamic regions. Or, they could’ve converted to Christianity under the influence of the Roman-controlled Middle East. Speaking of Christianity, let’s see what would’ve happened to this religion had the Roman Empire never fallen.

First, let’s get our facts straight – Christianity had already established itself as the primary religion of the Western Roman Empire by the fourth century A.D. So if the Empire had never fallen, this religion would likely only spread farther and more effectively. What’s more, it might’ve even become the dominant religion sooner—by the third century A.D.—thanks to the stability of the Roman Empire.

Besides the stability of the Empire, several other factors could’ve influenced the accelerated spread of this religion. First of all, in the alternate reality, this Empire wouldn’t have undergone a significant demographic change, allowing the Emperors greater authority to enforce the traditional Roman faith. Next, the popularity of this religion, combined with the promised benefits of the afterlife, would’ve converted virtually all Roman politicians and aristocrats to Christianity, which would only further aid its spread.

And finally, the Roman connection to the East would also have played a huge role in spreading Christianity beyond the Roman Empire. After all, the well-established trade routes would’ve created a conducive environment for transmitting ideas, including religious ones. So, with the Roman Empire still standing, Christianity would likely become a global force.

However, this religion might’ve been slightly different than the one we know today, as it would’ve had to adapt to the Roman Pagan customs to some extent. The greater spread of Christianity would’ve likely contributed to a more unified Europe. But that’s not the only way the continued existence of the Roman Empire would impact Europe. The Roman Empire, still standing in all its glory, would’ve prevented Europe from splitting into smaller kingdoms and nations, creating a more centralized continent. This means that there would be no Spain, France, or Italy in our alternate reality, as these and similar nations were formed in the ashes of the Roman Empire.

Of course, this new, homogenous Europe would look up to the Roman Empire, possibly adopting its institutions, legal systems, and cultural norms. But what about the other continents? For instance, what would’ve happened to North America—and the U.S.—if the Roman Empire had still existed? Well, it’s simple – it would’ve likely been a part of the Roman Empire.

You see, the Vikings first discovered North America in the 10th century. At this point, the Roman Empire would’ve still been as mighty as ever, which means word would’ve swiftly traveled back to the Roman Emperor. And where there’s new land, there’s potential for imperial ambitions. In our alternate reality, the Roman Emperor would likely send an exploration party to North America. Realizing the potential of this vast new land, Rome would conquer it in its entirety. Of course, this wouldn’t happen overnight. After all