No Komnenian restoration, a Norman Empire instead?

[Vinization]

Alexios I had a very hard time at the beginning of his reign as the Eastern Roman Emperor, having inherited an empire wrecked by years of civil war and the loss of Anatolia after the Battle of Manzikert. As if that weren't enough, he had to deal with the Normans who, one decade after conquering Constantinople's last stronghold in Italy, invaded the Balkans in 1081, scoring a devastating victory at the Battle of Dyrrhachium and overrunning much of Greece. The invaders were at last defeated at the Battle of Larissa, and the next decades were marked by a resurgence of Byzantine fortunes under the Komnenian restoration.

But what if the Normans scored yet another victory in Larissa, rather than being forced to retreat? Could they take over all of Greece, and from there capture Thessalonica and perhaps even Constantinople itself? Assuming the Queen of Cities falls under their rule, could they create a new empire, one stretching from Naples and Sicily to Bulgaria and the Bosphorous? Or would they be nothing more than a bigger version of the Latin Empire?

Lastly, would they call for a crusade, julst like Alexios did IOTL? My guess is almost certainly yes, given the Seljuk presence in Anatolia.

 

[kholieken]

Western and coastal part of Anatoliais still held by powerful dynatoi, like Commeni family. They likely still powerful enough to repeat Paleologus recapturing of Constantinople and part of Greece.

 

[Madhukar_Shah]

If you're open to an earlier pod, Roussel de Bailleuls realm surviving and managing to dominate central and eastern Anatolia would massively help Norman's coming from the west in dominating Constantinople.

 

[Vinization]

Western and coastal part of Anatoliais still held by powerful dynatoi, like Commeni family. They likely still powerful enough to repeat Paleologus recapturing of Constantinople and part of Greece.

That will definitely create a vacuum of power in those regions, and the Turks are right around the corner to exploit it...

If you're open to an earlier pod, Roussel de Bailleuls realm surviving and managing to dominate central and eastern Anatolia would massively help Norman's coming from the west in dominating Constantinople.

He was a very fascinating character, but I wonder if he'd do more harm than good by, say, challenging the Hautevilles over the Roman throne.

 

[Madhukar_Shah]

He was a very fascinating character, but I wonder if he'd do more harm than good by, say, challenging the Hautevilles over the Roman throne.

I also don't see anything on his religious policies, so he might cause a pro/anti papacy split in the norman community, idk.

 

[SealTheRealDeal]

Would such a Norman Empire be better able to protect it's African territory?

 

[Vinization]

Would such a Norman Empire be better able to protect it's African territory?

Perhaps, but I think they'd focus their efforts on Anatolia.

Is it possible for the Normans to convert to Orthodoxy? It'd make ruling Constantinople easier, plus their relations with the papacy were pretty bad IIRC.

 

[TickTock The Witch's Dead]

It really depends if the Normans are willing to convert to Orthodoxy. Because the Byzantines had almost no tolerance for the Catholics at this point.

 

[Elfwine]

I think "almost no tolerance for the Catholics at this point" may be overstating it, but the Normans trying to rule this area without some religious pragmatism feels like it would not end well - whether from the Greek rite or Latin rite areas.

Not sure they'd call for a crusade though - the Normans (if they've achieved the conquests mentioned) don't seem like they'd think there's any reason to go to extraordinary measures to get more soldiers, even if they think they need more.

 

[raharris1973]

Would they (Norman conquerors of Byzantium) get Crusaders passing through to Asia Minor and the Holy Land, even if they didn't ask for any and didn't want any?

 

[TickTock The Witch's Dead]

I think "almost no tolerance for the Catholics at this point" may be overstating it, but the Normans trying to rule this area without some religious pragmatism feels like it would not end well - whether from the Greek rite or Latin rite areas.

Not sure they'd call for a crusade though - the Normans (if they've achieved the conquests mentioned) don't seem like they'd think there's any reason to go to extraordinary measures to get more soldiers, even if they think they need more.

I feel like the Normans are going to make some very serious promises to the Greeks to leave their faith alone. Not impossible since Norman Italy was tolerant towards Orthodox Christians and Muslims before. Though the biggest challenge would most likely be the Normans dealing with the Turks. Not sure if that can go well.

 

[Elfwine]

I feel like the Normans are going to make some very serious promises to the Greeks to leave their faith alone. Not impossible since Norman Italy was tolerant towards Orthodox Christians and Muslims before. Though the biggest challenge would most likely be the Normans dealing with the Turks. Not sure if that can go well.

It's certainly getting towards over-extension, if nothing worse.

 

[TickTock The Witch's Dead]

It's certainly getting towards over-extension, if nothing worse.

Not to mention infighting between Catholics and Orthodox Christians will be bad.

Also I just realized I misinterpreted this as being post-4th crusade. Whoops.

 

[Galba Otho Vitelius]

On the comments about the Normans having difficulty not being Orthodox, I'm pretty sure the answer is that this wouldn't have been an issue.

Normans rules over lots of Orthodox subjects in southern Italy and Syria without any problem. And the latest formal split only happened in 1054. I actually never understood why it wasn't patched up.

Normans successfully conquered England and displaced almost the entire native aristocracy. One reason they were so remarkable is that they could rule disparate kingdoms without any obvious support from the local population. So if Alexios had been a worse general -he was actually quite good- they would have done fine.

Their issue is that they would have faced the same problems as the Commeni, the loss of Anatolia and the hollowing out of the local economy. The Normans were vigorous rulers, but the Commeni were pretty capable, so the Normans are not necessarily going to be more successful in dealing with these problems.

 

[Avrorrange]

Western and coastal part of Anatoliais still held by powerful dynatoi, like Commeni family. They likely still powerful enough to repeat Paleologus recapturing of Constantinople and part of Greece.

No. That area is under control of the Turks. Most likely, the empire would need to survive in Bulgaria.

 

[SunZi]

The post seems to have come back to life but the subject of a death of Alexios and a takeover of the Empire by the Normans has not been broached.

If Alexios dies trying to free Larissa, there may be a collapse of the Byzantine Empire. We can imagine the imperial court proclaiming Constantine Doukas as emperor, but the one at 10, so either some sort of regency of Mary of Alania will be installed or a Byzantine artistocrat will take over, retaining Constantine as co-emperor like Alexios before him . Opposite, the Normans can advance their candidate, a monk named Raiktor, who proclaimed himself to be Micheal VII (father of Constantin Doukas) but he may have already died during the battle of Larissa (probably killed by Robert Guiscard at Dyrrhachium) or re-demanding the union of young Constatin with Olympias de Hauteville, daughter of Guiscard captive in Constantinople after Alexios broke the marriage plan.

The imperials could be ready to accept it as there was also the Turkish threat to the west, notably Tzachas in Smyrna who threatened the capital. Although Guiscard is busy repelling Emperor Henry IV in Rome and saving Pope Gregory VII. With the victory of his son Bohemond of Taranto over Alexios, Guiscard can easily land in the Balkans with the secret objective of making himself emperor or making emperor Bohemond or one of his other sons (we can imagine that Guiscard obtains the hand of 'Anna Comnena for Bohemond view that she is Porphyrogenita, especially attracting all the covetous to her). Even if Robert dies, through age or illness, would Bohemond be ambitious enough to aim for the Imperial throne? I like to imagine that yes.