The Eagle of the Bosporus

[Elfwine]

This timeline is basically the same as the one below, but owing to some research and discussion since the original thread was posted, it is being restarted.

http://alternatehistory.com/discussi...d.php?t=192188

Credit goes to the same people as originally. Were it not for their work, this timeline would remain merely a vague dream of a world with a surviving Byzantine Empire. As before, Latin spellings are normal, though the author reserves the right to be inconsistent. The term "Byzantine"/Roman/Rhomanian all refer to the same empire (except when it is obviously that the Holy Roman Empire and its supporters are referring to their state as Roman).

The POD is in 1166, when a son is born to Manuel Comnenus. Despite this, nothing much changes until 1176, when Manuel in an uncharacteristic moment of caution, accepts the Seljuk Sultan's offer of part of Turkish Anatolia in exchange for a ten year truce between the Empire and the Sultanate.

Chapter 1 begins seven years into this truce, with the ascension of Alexius II.

[Elfwine]

Chapter I

On November 13 1183, Manuel I died of a lingering illness. His only son, the seventeen year old Alexius, took the throne without conflict.

On the surface, with Roman armies in both Anatolia and the West having been largely successful in their endeavors, the state looked stronger than it had been since Manzikert, just over a century previously.

But with the treasury depleted and relations with the Holy Roman Empire and Papacy grown chilly, the Empire that the young basileus had inherited could easily lose more than it had gained from his father's conquests.

Worse, the dynatoi had taken advantage of Manuel's inability to focus on any one area long enough to secure it to strengthen their position, some even at the expense of the state. While the Komnenoi were closely allied to the Empire's military aristocracy, that did not make the growth of the powerful less worrisome - if anything, it offered the opportunity for those who saw the young emperor as a puppet to use the situation for their benefit and further undermine imperial control.

In an effort to concentrate on internal affairs, Alexius chose to abandon some of Manuel's western conquests, establishing Bosnia and Serbia as mostly autonomous Roman client states as well as returning control of Dalmatia and eastern Croatia to King Béla of Hungary. King Béla, who had maintained friendly relations with Manuel even after losing his claim to the imperial throne in 1169 in favor of the emperor's own son, promised his friendship to the young Emperor, considerably lightening the burden of defending the Empire's western territory.

But even with foreign affairs running smoothly, internal problems could still bring down the Emperor. Even Isaac Comnenus, grand nephew of Manuel I, would be part of the problem, taking advantage of his newly founded freedom to seize control of the island of Cyprus and proclaim himself emperor, a situation which would trouble the empire for three years before a combination of an Imperial fleet and Isaac's own overconfidence would see him overthrown and the island returned to imperial control.

And then there was the imperial bureaucracy. Corrupt, unsupervised, and cruelly grinding down the peasantry - which by coincidence would only serve to further the problem of the dynatoi, as the only ones able to resist the pressures of the tax collectors. It is not surprising that between all of these problems that the Frankish states in the Levant - nominally Imperial vassals but de facto independent - would be ignored almost entirely until it became clearly that the usual squabbles between Frank and Saracen had become dangerously tilted in favor of the latter.

In October 1187, the great Muslim leader Saladin had taken the city of Jerusalem, and most of the Frankish kingdom of the same name. Had this been all, it would have been startling but hardly unpleasant - better an honest Saracen than a Frank who couldn't be trusted as far as one could throw a fully armored cataphract. Unfortunately, the West disagreed. And as the Roman Empire stood between the kingdoms of the West and the Holy Land, Alexius's response would be crucial to the Empire's fate.

The First Crusade had been bad, though not disasterous - the Empire had even recovered some of its territory in Anatolia as a consequence. But the the Second Crusade had been worse, with the Franks loudly blaming "Greek treachery" as the source of their failure rather than their own incompetence. If things continued to decline, how long would it be until the so-called warriors of Christ turned on the Empire, heading not for Jerusalem but for Constantinople? When news arrived that Frederick Barbarossa, Emperor of the so-called "Holy Roman" Empire, had taken the cross, it seemed almost inevitable.

Something would have to be done to reverse the trend of increasing hostility between Rhoman and Frank. Attempts at religious union in his father's day had certainly not helped, and even if they could help the likelihood would be that it would increase tensions internally against the emperor - hardly more desirable than a foreign invasion, which could at least be bought off. Or could it? Frederick was a man known for a formidable temper and an ability to hold grudges, and it seemed rather more likely that he would take offers of gold as a sign of Roman weakness and grow more demanding rather than less.

[TheLordProtector]

And you've got me hooked. Subscribed, I can't wait to see what Alexius has up his sleeve. I'm a bit dubious as to your POD though: Manuel showing sense? :P

[ImmortalImpi]

Very, very nice. I'll be watching.

[Elfwine]

Originally Posted by TheLordProtector

And you've got me hooked. Subscribed, I can't wait to see what Alexius has up his sleeve. I'm a bit dubious as to your POD though: Manuel showing sense? :P

Sufficient to say, Alexius is planning on taking advantage of Frederick's army being the next best thing to unstoppable.

Saying more would be spoiling, however.

And on Manuel:
http://www.alternatehistory.com/disc...ad.php?t=34282

I'm not the only one who thinks it is marginally possible for him to get a clue.

But as you can see from the description of Alexius's troubles, it really doesn't make up for the problems Alexius is facing - it just means the situation in Asia Minor is slightly (and potentially temporarily tilted in Byzantium's favor compared to OTL. If Alexius was as bad as Manuel's OTL successors, it would just be a minor setback for one of the Empire's many foes.

Note: I may be slow about adding updates, sorting out how to write the "So how does Alexius deal with Frederick?" part is going to take some thought.

[Basileus Giorgios]

Interesting. What's happened to the unrest in Bulgaria? I suspect, even allowing for butterflies, that that particular pot will boil over at some point in the 1180s or 1190s, which could prove to be the real test of Alexius' abilities as Emperor- can he deal with rebellious Bulgars and crusading Latins all in one go?

[Elfwine]

Originally Posted by Basileus Giorgios

Interesting. What's happened to the unrest in Bulgaria? I suspect, even allowing for butterflies, that that particular pot will boil over at some point in the 1180s or 1190s, which could prove to be the real test of Alexius' abilities as Emperor- can he deal with rebellious Bulgars and crusading Latins all in one go?

What exactly inspired the rebellion (OTL)?

I don't know enough about that to have any ideas at the moment, but I'd rather not assume that it only happened because Isaac II was a moron. Alexius being forced to try to do six things at once (not unlike his great-grandfather) will mean something gets neglected, and Bulgaria's relationship with Constantinople has never been warm.

[ByzantineCaesar]

Good to see this back

Originally Posted by Elfwine

On November 13 1183, Manuel I died of a lingering illness. His only son, the seventeen year old Alexius, took the throne without conflict.

One question: does Myriokephalon happens ITTL?

In an effort to concentrate on internal affairs, Alexius chose to abandon some of Manuel's western conquests, establishing native bans as rulers of mostly autonomous Roman client states and returning control of Dalmatia and eastern Croatia to King Béla of Hungary. King Béla, who had maintained largely friendly relations with Manuel even after losing his claim to the imperial throne in 1169 in favor of the emperor's own son, responded favorably, considerably lightening the burden of defending the Empire's western territory.

Ah, good old Béla. He was a great king. Unfortunately he died young. Please, let him live a little longer ITTL. Maybe until the late 1210's and he gets a cool epiteth too? Oh, and shouldn't this 1169 be 1166?

In October 1187, the great Muslim leader Saladin had taken the city of Jerusalem, and most of the Frankish kingdom of the same name. Had this been all, it would have been startling but hardly unpleasant - better an honest Saracen than a Frank who couldn't be trusted as far as one could throw a fully armored cataphract. Unfortunately, the West disagreed. And as the Roman Empire stood between the kingdoms of the West and the Holy Land, Alexius's response would be crucial to the Empire's fate.

Interesting. Who's the defender of Jerusalem? Balian of Ibelin as OTL? If yes, maybe this could have some serious implications. Remember that Balian's wife is Maria Komnena, great-granddaughter of Emperor John II. Maybe he can join the Third Crusade and do some relevant stuff with Roman help? It would be awesome if he became King of Jerusalem (if the Crusade is successful). I know of course that this isn't the same Balian as in Kingdom of Heaven, but it would be cool nonetheless.

Anyway, I eagerly await the next update

[Elfwine]

Originally Posted by ByzantineCaesar

Good to see this back

Thanks.

One question: does Myriokephalon happens ITTL?

No. Manuel's decision to accept the Sultan's offer averts it.

Ah, good old Béla. He was a great king. Unfortunately he died young. Please, let him live a little longer ITTL. Maybe until the late 1210's and he gets a cool epiteth too? Oh, and shouldn't this 1169 be 1166?

I have no plans for him, and all I really know on him is the wikipedia article.
So anything you can add on him and his life would be welcome.

I have absolutely no problem having him living longer or getting a cool epithet however. Great kings dying young should be averted when possible. OTL had enough of that.

And no, Manuel went back and forth on the subject (TTL) and finally decided against Béla being his heir. I might change the date though - how long after Alexius's birth OTL did Manuel decide to disinherit Béla?

Interesting. Who's the defender of Jerusalem? Balian of Ibelin as OTL? If yes, maybe this could have some serious implications. Remember that Balian's wife is Maria Komnena, great-granddaughter of Emperor John II. Maybe he can join the Third Crusade and do some relevant stuff with Roman help? It would be awesome if he became King of Jerusalem (if the Crusade is successful). I know of course that this isn't the same Balian as in Kingdom of Heaven, but it would be cool nonetheless.

Nothing has changed in the Levant as of 1187, so yes. The "Frank you can't trust" is a jab at Guy and Reynald, if it isn't clear.

I don't see any reason he can't join the Third Crusade TTL, what got in the way OTL?

Anyway, I eagerly await the next update

Will be coming soon. Muses willing.

[Elfwine]

Chapter 1, Part II.

The Crusaders had entered the Empire towards the end of June in the year 1189, and trouble began almost immediately. Despite Frederick's strenuous efforts to keep control of his army and to punish those who "behaved more like brigands than soldiers of Christ", incidents of some sort or another were just about inevitable with an army the size Frederick was leading, and especially on foreign soil. No self-respecting Romans were entirely comfortable with the idea of a Frankish army, with its strange accents and stranger customs marching through their lands, and even the efforts of Alexius to ensure that things ran smoothly were often undermined by neglectful or incompetent officials who were more concerned about their interests than the Emperor's commands.

Had Frederick not been more concerned about the recapture of Jerusalem than causing his eastern rival difficulty in revenge for Manuel's support of the Lombard League three decades earlier, the Roman Empire could have been dealt a severe blow with little trouble, both by the crusaders themselves and those who would eagerly have allied even with the Franks in order to undermine the rule of Constantinople. But Barbaross's attention was fixed on the crusade, and those who saw him as a chance to weaken the East were turned away. He had sworn to not lift a sword against fellow Christians, and would not listen to those who claimed that the Greeks were "no true Christians" at all. So long as their Emperor did not stand in his way, he would treat him with all the respect due a fellow Christian monarch.

For Alexius, this could not have been better news. Those who lay in the path of the German crusaders in the summer and fall of 1189 might not have been so quick to agree, but most grudgingly recognized that the German army was better disciplined than expected - faint praise, but preferable to the tales of barbarians whose chieftains had encouraged the savagery of their followers rather than checking it that they had heard from those who remembered the Second Crusade forty odd years previously.

Despite the efforts of both Emperors - and the eagerness of the crusaders to reach their destination - it was not until late October before the full crusading army had reached Thrace, and the weather had become problematic for a continued advance. Nevertheless, Frederick was determined to press on. The sooner the army crossed the Hellespont, the sooner they would reach Jerusalem. After a delay in which the necessary ships were rounded up - the number of Germans being more than expected at the time of the agreement at Nuremburg the year before - the crossing was made. Along with the Germans was a contingent of Roman troops lead by Theodore Vatatzes. Numbering only a fraction of the size of the German host, the Romans - while not the equals of the armies lead by Basil II over a century and a half ago- were still among the best soldiers in Christendom.

Before the end of January, the two armies had entered the lands of the Seljuks, and it had become clear that the Turks were not interested in keeping their word to let them pass unhindered. In response, the two armies turned towards Iconium, capital of the Seljuk Sultanate. If the Turks would not keep their word, then the Romans and Germans would be more than pleased to take advantage of the opportunity to punish them for their treachery.

Had Alexius known of how exactly events had passed since the two armies entered Asia Minor, he would have no doubt found the situation pleasing. After six years patiently waiting for an opportunity to weaken the Turkish grasp on central Anatolia, one had finally come to him. Better yet, the Germans would supply the majority of the forces that would seize the opportunity, but all the benefits would come to him - for whereas Barbarossa saw Iconium as insignificant compared to Jerusalem, it meant nothing less than the chance to shatter the unity of the Turks for Alexius. And then it would be merely a matter of picking up the pieces.

[Elfwine]

A question for my readers (those who have commented so far and anyone who has any thoughts on the subject): Should I turn now to cover events in the Holy Land from the fall of Jerusalem up to the present (March 1190), or should I continue with the march of Barbarossa and the oncoming siege of Iconium?

Also, any suggested changes or overlooked mistakes of spelling and/or grammar that you wish to call to my attention would be appreciated.

Thank you for reading.

[Faeelin]

Originally Posted by Elfwine

. Along with the Germans was a contingent of Roman troops lead by Theodore Vatatzes which numbered only a fraction of the size of the German host but far better disciplined.

Mmm. Was this true? I thought by OTL's 1170s the Roman armies were mostly mercenary forces?

[Yelnoc]

Yay. I don't have much to comment on, so mark me down as a silent reader.

[Archangel]

Subscribed, Elfwine!

[Elfwine]

Originally Posted by Archangel

Subscribed, Elfwine!

To the readers: Brief update to come later today on the next few years after 1194 and up to the Fourth Crusade.

Events in the Levant and Anatolia are seeing the Ayyubids and Seljuks fighting it out over the issue of who takes over - (TTL Saladin dies at the end of 1192), just to get that out of the way.

Any places outside the HRE and Byzantium you want a glance at in the write up, please speak up.

By and large things are going as OTL - no major butterflies...so far.

[Basileus444]

I think the narrative flow is good so far. I'm interested to see what happens when the butterflies start hitting Russia. Moscow's still just a puny blip on the map.

On the target of the Fourth Crusade, one possibility could be Spain. Perhaps Las Navas de Tolosa goes in favor in the Almohads and the Iberian Christians need to be bailed out.

And I'm now subscribed.

[Elfwine]

Sufficient to say, events in Russia and Iberia will be worth following.

Here's a brief summary of the main events I want to note. Some are as OTL, some are not.

Sicily falls to Henry VI, greatly strengthening the power base of the Staufen.

On December 18 1194, an heir to Henry VI is born - named Frederick after his grandfather. A year and a half later, Henry has another cause for celebration - after much hard bargaining and compromising, both the secular and ecclesiastic princes of the empire have agreed to accept the throne becoming hereditary, not elective. Even with the acceptance of hereditary succession for the secular princes in exchange for their support, the position of the emperor is greatly strengthened - particularly as raising an "anti-king" is no longer a feasible option for the Pope or other opponents.

October 3: Theodore Comnenus, second son of Alexius II, is born.

What had been the Sultanate of Rum in Anatolia remains disputed between the sons of the late sultan, all of which seek the support of the Emperor in the quarrel. Under these circumstances, the only winner is likely to be the Emperor, despite his caution about advancing too far too soon into Anatolia - as the old lands of the sultanate are ideal territory for the tribal Turcomen until the situation stabilizes, one way or another. But that's what the Akritai are for, no?

The Ayyubid princes battle for control of Saladin's empire. There is some talk in Europe of a crusade to "finish what the last began", but it goes nowhere, primarily due to events in the Iberian peninsula.

King Alfonso VIII of Castile is killed at in battle at Alarcos and his army destroyed. The crown passes to his five year old son.

Under the rulership of Queen Tamar, Georgia begins to expand at the expense of its neighbors, reducing Shivan to a vassal and securing parts of what had been the (old) kingdom of Armenia.

Alexius's half-sister Anna is married off (in 1200) to Prince Roman Mstislavich, currently the strongest of the southern Rus princes.

[Sassanid Saxon]

I hope this thread continues! It will be interesting to see if the Komnenoi develop to a point where they can absorb Syria and Egypt. Is ruling over a Muslim population in the cards for them?

[Tongera]

Just noticed something. Manuel didn't train Alexios at all, or very little. How would he know what to do?

[Tongera]

Bumping this.