Renovation: An Eastern Roman Timeline

[Deleted member 67076]

Hey there AH.com. I've been a member here for a few years now, and a huge fan of the Eastern Roman Empire and its history. Despite my decently good knowledge of the state, I've always been wary of attempting to do a timeline on the subject matter as I haven't felt confident in my abilities to create a good timeline that would stand out. I wanted to be unique in my efforts and craft a timeline that deals with a late Eastern Roman revival through an (to my knowledge) entirely underutilized and seldom discussed period: The Second Palaiologoi Civil War during the first half of the 1300s. Arguably one of the most critical periods of Byzantine history, its is perhaps best known as the war that really destroyed Byzantine Power, leaving it a bankrupt, tiny, rump state at the mercy of its neighbors with enemies at all sides.

Here, I plan to turn the revive the Eastern Roman Empire into a power by means of transforming it into something... unique. A cross between a gunpowder empire and a merchant state, if you will, rather than having simple military victories and territorial expansion following a period of good luck and excellent leadership as is the norm here. If any of you are familiar with the Zealots of Thessalonica and their ilk, we may also see some elements reminiscent of socialism in the state apparatus.

Now, some of you on the site may find this to be a time where its too late to return the Eastern Roman Empire to its former glories; and there is quite a lot of merit to that school of thought, though it is one I don't particularly agree with. Hopefully this timeline will attempt to tackles these issues and plot out a path to success.

In any case, after a year of intensive research, the help of various members here and questionable amounts of that liquid courage known as alcohol, I humbly present Renovation (or rather the prologue). Any comments and criticisms are welcome.

--------

Renovation
​

​

“One of the most curious quirks of history is what the late Medieval Roman Empire refers to as ‘The Renovation’; this period of massive social, political and economic change that starts a new chapter in the empire. A fresh start if you will, where the slow, humiliating decline of the past 140 or so years is halted and the slate is wiped clean! This newer, stronger, healthier empire emerges from this period of restructuring better than it has been in ages. Its like a house getting refurbished -hence the name- and, like that refurbished house, it weathers the storms and the earthquakes and all other problems much better than it otherwise would have, so that the people residing in that house can live in peace.”

The 14th century was not kind a kind one to the Roman Empire. Following the aftermath of the infamous Fourth Crusade, the remnants of Rome become a shadow of their once glorious self. They are fractured, stagnant and handicapped by a myriad of issues that impede renewal. Despite numerous attempts on setting the empire on the road to recovery, to keep the empire afloat, it all appears in vain. This new era is one of a slow, painful and seemingly irreversible decline.

On all sides, the empire is under siege. To the east, Turkish incursions renew their offense clawing apart at Byzantium’s important Asian provinces, the first in a century since the mighty Komnenoi emperors have pushed them back. Multitudes of tribes have poured in and begun carving out their own small fiefdoms. Most worrying are the nascent Ottoman Beylik, under the rule of the ambitious and frighteningly competent Orhan. In the North, the rising power of Serbia and the Second Bulgarian Empire threaten the European holdings. And to the west are the Latin states. They exploit rather than aid. They fracture instead of unify. They harm when they should heal. Caught between all sides and weakened by generations of war, Rome is in a precarious place. But the worst comes from within the empire.

Following the ascension of the Palaiologoi dynasty the balance of power has drastically swung in favor of the aristocracy. While this is not a new thing; (the aristocratic favoritism is something deeply Roman, going back to the days of the ancient republic), since the Komnenoi era this trend has dramatically accelerated. The meritocracy of the previous Macedonian dynasty has been eroded with time, as has their care for the lower classes; the smallholders and the urban mob. This trend further continues with the new dynasty, perhaps continuing to its logical extreme. It is this favoritism that has in part hastened the decay of the empire, as the aristocracy has been given freer rein to expand their power. The aristocracy, rich and bloated at the expense of the state and the poor, further bleed the empire dry. The government, struggling to reform is unable to fix the underlying problems of the state nor alleviate the problems faced by the peasants. Impoverishment and misrule have become depressingly common.

In reaction, there is anger and resentment. Justifiably so. The people toil and yet there is no respite. No end to the staggering amount of problems that plague their homeland. It is fertile ground for those who wish to gain support for change… or for those seeking power. Some wish for reform, and others revolution. Either one has their merits in the people’s eyes. As the years pass and the situation grows ever more bleak, the more sway these advocates for change have… and the more the people wish to fight. To strike back at their tormentors.

In 1341, the straw that breaks the camel’s back came with the death of emperor Andronikos, third of that name. In the ensuing power struggle there emerged two power blocs gunning for control: The camp of John Kantakouzenos, who fought to continue the Ancien Regime of aristocratic rule and traditionalism that the state has come to known, and the camp of Alexios Apokaukos, led by those who had wished for change to come to Rhomania. And so bloody civil war had broken out, further sapping what little resources remain.

Currently, the year is 1341. The empire stands broken, battered and bloody. But it is far from beaten.

 

[Deleted member 67076]

“… [The Restoration is] A period where reality kinda looks stranger than fiction, I mean, the story plays out like a cliche ridden fantasy when you read it: It starts off with the land in chaos. The bloated nobility has grown rich and decadent, and their abuse of the people they’re supposed to have managed has weakened the empire at all corners and just caused all sorts of problems. Meanwhile, the common people are angry, they are mistreated, they are overtaxed, invaded, their lands are taken from them… all sorts of humiliations. Eventually they have enough of it. They pray for a hero to come to them and deliver them from their problems and inflict righteous justice on the upper classes that mistreated them… sure enough, they get one! In 1341, this confident, forward looking, virtuous man comes on stage and he takes charge. and challenges the nobility for rule of the empire. He leads this... crusade against their decadence with the people rising up and joining him, where they proceed to crush and expel their abusers and usher in a time of peace and prosperity. At the same time, the hero stays, overseeing that his efforts are not in vain, with the future emperor raised under the guidance of their hero to make sure the future is in good hands, and after the hero dies, this new emperor takes over and leads his people into a Golden Age…. That’s the regular story. The truth is, of course, a hell of a lot more darker and murky.”

To track the roots of the Renovation, one must go back to the era directly preceding it: the final years and death of the emperor Andronicus III and the culmination of a long dynastic rule. We must analyze the state of affairs, the trends and the geopolitics in and surrounding the Roman Empire during his era that led to its nadir of power. As such, let us briefly return to two different time periods. The year of our Lord 1204, at the dreaded Fourth Crusade, and directly following the imperial restoration at the reconquest of Constantinople from the Latin Empire in 1261.

Now, when the Latin Empire captured the great city of Constantinople, the Imperial court relocated to the lakeside city of Nicaea in Asia Minor with the hopes of eventually retaking the capital when the time was right. Initially command was held by Theodore Lascaris whose reforms to accommodate the new position of the empire alienated many of nobles who had grown accustomed to the Komnenoi policies favoring those of high rank and social stature. However, his victory against the empire’s enemies and restoration of imperial territorial integrity allowed him to lead without much difficulty at home. But, when he died he left the empire in a regency for his son John. This in turn created a vacuum of power which allowed the conservative aristocrats to plan and make a bid for power. Rallying around Michael Palaeologus, a confident, charismatic man who was head of one of the largest noble clans, this aristocratic faction conspired against the young emperor and launched a coup. Installing himself as John IV’s Regent and Co-Emperor, young John IV was soon deposed by his supposedly junior-emperor, who then crowned himself as Michael VIII. This is where the trouble begins.

Now Michael did rule successfully. Constantinople was liberated in 1261, the Empire was re-established in Greece proper (with a few exceptions), all the pressing enemies were defeated and it once more became a (borderline) great power. And yet, with his grab for power Michael VII set the stage for a conservative, aristocratic minded dynasty with increasingly limited resources. Despite energetic campaigns, the Byzantine state was too exhausted and cash-strapped to fully take advantage of the opportunities granted to them, and were undermined in commerce (a potentially large source of income to supplement taxes on land) by the Italian city states. The policy of “Europe first” had opened the empire to attacks by Charles I of Sicily (who dealt the empire a heavy blow) and renewed raids to the Turkish statelets of the east. With hindsight we can see the faults in this policy but few at the time could have predicted that. Constantinople was of course the pride and joy of the empire and retaking territory from the weak and divided Latin Barons who ruled over the unhappy masses of Greeks must have seemed like the easier and wiser thing to do than waste resources to retake land in Anatolia, where the previous dynasty had tried but failed to secure the former heartlands for almost a century.

Now then, let’s fast forward several decades- almost a full century after the reconquest of Constantinople: The Empire has steadily been eroded on all fronts, too weak to retake its lost lands and too stubborn and unable to find effective means of solving their problems. Problems were dealt with the method and mindset that their forebearers used- to mixed to limited results. At the same time the aristocratic favoritism that has begun under the Komenoi has continued unopposed, granting new privileges to an already bloated nobility. This erosion of the tax base, weakening of the central government, loss of land, money and prestige has left an incredibly dissatisfied and enraged outlook on the masses while the elite increased their wealth, power and influence in the empire to levels that had not been seen since the Principate. This was due to, in response to losing all this territory, the tax burden had to be raised in order to maintain the same level of effectiveness. But the current government, in coordination and domination by rural elites created many an exemption for the nobility to pay taxes. Thus, the burden was placed onto the poor.

To make it worse, the stubborn and conservative government refuse to adapt to potential new solutions, most prominently the refusal to invest in commerce and mercantile matters as a way to generate wealth like that of the great Merchant Republics. Commerce was seen as ‘un-Roman’ and ‘beneath’ the elite who preferred to place their investments into great landholding estates. (It is also this factor that made the noble dominated state less receptive to defending their territories; one can always move to another estate if they have more land after all, but the poor who have everything to lose if that small plot is taken from them will fight to the death) These two factions grew increasingly radicalized and inflexible as time went by from either the lack of meaningful change or the growing ungratefulness of restless masses (take your pick), eventually believing that only force would get them what they wanted.

Thus the stage was set for a massive conflict of interests and worldviews. All that would need to spark this war was a power vacuum where the reformists and lower classes could make a play for power. In 1341, with the death of Andronicus the reformists got their wish.

 

[Deleted member 67076]

Once more I'm grateful for the support and commentary. Does wonders for creativity.

Great stuff here, old boy! I rather look forward to the start of something new in Romania: Lord knows the Empire needed change in a bad way.

Which is also why Im really sceptical of a lot of late Roman revivals. The just focus on obtaining more land and peasants to tax, maybe with a change in army structure and equipment but they dont focus on rooting out the key issues that plagued the state.

I agree. I'd also like to say watch out for mercenaries: they devolved into wandering bands that raped and pillage their way through Greece at this time. The state needs its own honest-to-God army again. Throwing coins into the outstretched palms of greedy foreigners only makes the problem worse.

The good news is that at this point due to the massive depression in wages for the local peasantry and the debasement in Byzantine currency it'd probably be cheaper to pay soldiers in cash while outfitting them the bare minimum to survive rather than hire a few elite mercenary units. So, if things go well and the state can get a better source of finances it can outfit a decently sized native force of 15,000 or so soldiers.

So this is what we talked about a few days ago, excellent. I have to admit, I'm already intrigued, even though the first two updates were little more than exposition (nothing wrong with that, of course).

This is a period where I kind of have to give background on to what the hell's going on. There's a myriad of factors in place that led to the rapid shifts in the balance of power and what not that's pretty easy to overlook to be honest. (Which sucks because most general sources just ignore the period) If I want to make it plausible, Ive to slow down and look at each and every change that's been going on.

Interesting. Apokaukos may not be perfect but I feel like he deserved a better chance.

Apokaukos has honestly has to be one of the most underused statesmen in all of Alternate History.

-----

While the stage was being set for war, in this period lies the rise of the brilliant man who would orchestrate one of the most drastic reformations of the imperial state: The, competent, ambitious and forward thinking Alexios Apokaukos. A man of humble birth, who through combination of ambition, skill and knowing the right people rose to the positions of Chamberlain (Parakoimomenos)[1], Mesazon [2], and shortly before the death of Andronicus, Grand Admiral of the Byzantine Navy (Megas Doux), all while amassing great wealth. (Whether he got that money from successful business deals or plundering the treasury is up for debate; either way you shouldn’t care)

Alexios, due to his origins as a non-aristocrat held drastically different views than that of the ruling elite, believing that the path to reclaim greatness lay in not copying the efforts of older generations, but moving towards the future in a completely new direction. Rather than focusing on military might, he believed the empire should use soft power. Instead of wealth through great landed estates, Apokaukos preferred commercial ventures. He was, in heart, a reformist and made no effort to hide his view the empire should be more in line with that of city states of Venice and Genoa. And through the visible success of Italian merchants being literally everywhere in the former lands of the Byzantine empire, he made a very convincing case. As a firm pro western advocate, Apokaukos did all he could to have the empire start mimicking the policies of the Italian city states. He was a huge promoter of the navy, at one point paying out of his pocket over 100,000 hyperpyra to repair and re-equip the fleet, which had now shrunk to a paltry sum of less than 30 ships, most of them reclassified transport ships.

Now, as time went on and his position in the imperial government grew, he and like minded reformists (driven from the ranks of the bureaucrats and non nobles for the most part) worked to gain influence with the emperor and by extension, imperial policies. He succeeded, (partially) eventually becoming part of the regime's inner circle and gaining allies in the Patriarch John and the Empress, Anne of Savoy. Unfortunately this came at the cost of his relationship with his former mentor and friend, the equally brilliant John Kantakouzenos.

With Andronikos’ death, there began a power struggle for control over the regency of his heir, John. We see two main blocs form, one initially led by Patriarch John XIV (although quickly sidelined by the younger and more ambitious Apokaukos), and the other led by another brilliant statesman, John Kantakouzenos.

Kantakouzenos, in contrast to Apokaukos was the more stereotypical old money. Coming from a long line of government officials, he strove to become someone important in his life. Raised in wealth and privilege, the man became connected with the intricacies of the court from a young age and was distantly related to the ruling house through his mother. Like his father (the former governor of the Morea) before him, he joined the government bureaucracy, eventually became a close friend of Andronicus III, and helping to orchestrate the latter’s rise to the throne against his grandfather and predecessor, Andronicus II. An excellent diplomat, he secured an alliance with the Aydinid Beylik based in Smyrna and was a personal friend with its leader Umar, whom the latter referred to as “My Brother” (a testament of the close friendship the two enjoyed.) Umar frequently aided the Byzantines in many an endeavor, often bailing them out from raids and invasions from their many neighbors. Kantakouzenos was very popular back home, both among the nobility and the common man, but his position as a noble often alienated him from lower class bureaucrats unlike Apokaukos. Speaking of Apokaukos, John Kantakouzenos was indeed at one point the close friend and mentor of his future belligerent, aiding the former in his rise to power through good use of patronage and introducing the younger statesmen to powerful friends shortly after discovering the talented worker.

Unfortunately, Kantakouzenos was extensively pressured by the nobility to disassociate himself from his protege. The nobility resented the commoner’s humble origins and his quick rise in the imperial state apparatus, and wanted no part of his schemes. Thus, they shunned John, forcing him to cut off his patronage little by little, a blatant and aggressive move [3]. This understandably caused something a rift between the two which only grew as time went on.

[1] Chamberlain in the late Byzantine Empire occupied a position similar to a minister in the modern day UK government.

[2] Literally “Intermediary”. Essentially, Mesazon referred to one of the chief aids of the Emperor, working as both a secretary and a government minister.’

[3] I need to point out just how important patronage was to the Byzantine Empire at this time. With the establishment of a government run by a rather closed off group such as the nobility, patronage served as a way to introduce new people into the system. Who you knew was much more important that what you know. Good patrons and client system would ensure that you would gain access to high paying jobs, good land, business deals, etc. Thus it was a huge honor to be taken in by an aristocrat and shown the high society. Conversely, it was a very big insult to stop that patronage and recommendation, as it showed that the patron has lost all faith in the client.

 

[Deleted member 67076]

Long time lurker, first time commenter.

This has got to be an interesting one; I don’t think I’ve seen anyone try to save everybody’s favorite empire with a POD this late yet. I’ll be interested to see how it develops!

There was another timeline that tried to save the empire with a POD of 1444, of all years!

I must ask, was that bit at the beginning of the second update an intentional dig at post-modernist writers of history? Because if so it was great.

As much as I'd like to front and say it was, it actually wasn't.

I do hope Im not taking too much time trying to detail the civil war. If anyone wants, I can wrap this up right now.

-----

“Our Lord once said said in the Gospel of Matthew, Chapter 7, Verse 24, the wise man built his house upon the rock. That this rock was the foundation of his house. That the foundation was pivotal in allowing it to endure the challenges it must face. My friends, Rome is an old house. A old, durable house with the most perfect foundation. A foundation that has allowed us for over 1,000 years to have stood strong, withstanding every tribulation, every storm, every tremor that would dare threaten our house! ...But, my fellow Romans, like every old house there comes a time where it needs renovation.”

-Excerpt of a speech by Patriarch John XIV of Constantinople (1343)

June 1341: The Emperor is dead. Long live the Emperor.

With Andronikos’ death begins the ascension of his son as John V Palaiologos. The crowing is a relatively simple affair and John is crowned without much hassle. There’s only one problem: The Emperor is a 9 year old boy. The question of who is to be his regent is asked by the regime’s inner circle. Multiple arguments are given for who deserves the coveted position. One is for Kantakouzenos. John Kantakouzenos was the emperor’s best friend and ally for decades. He is a brilliant and educated man with experience and a successful career as a statesman. The alliance with the Aydins and the success in Epirus was his doing. Logically he should raise the child. But, custom dictated the Empress headed the regency. A boy should be with his mother no? Especially such a prestigious woman from the Savoyard family.

In any case, almost immediately after her husband’s death Anna stakes her claim. She is backed by the Patriarch also points out a document from 1334 that dictates the care of John was to be dictated by a member of the imperial family. Being the boy’s mother and the closest living relative, she makes the argument that no one is better suited than her. John and his supporters say otherwise. They are many and they are influential. The opposing side claims she is a foreigner, unfit to teach the boy to be a proper Roman and that her influence may be corrosive. That she lacks experience in foreign policy and the domestic situation of the empire. But the family refuses to budge. Arguments brew in response. The ordeal soon becomes public knowledge. Displays of loyalty to the old emperor intensify. Appeal to his memory on both sides. Which one was closer to Andronikos? The Wife or the Friend?

The tension grows as the days pass. Appeals turn into altercations. Fights in the street break out over supporters. A noble here is beaten by bureaucrats, a bureaucrat there is harassed by army officers there. Eventually a demonstration of the army is called in. The Polarization increases, yet nothing is resolved, and so John Kantakouzenos begins to pursue a new strategy. He leaves to rally support from both the international scene and the army in hopes this can pressure the opposing side into accepting his claim. He does not want war, but he knows he must show force.

In all this Apokaukos keeps quiet. He has secretly switched sides, but no one but the Patriarch knows yet. The reason being is the growing rift between the two has become unbearable. Once again denied a new position of power by John Kantakouzenos, and the increasing ways Kantakouzenos goes out to avoid his protege have done a number on their friendship. The realization that he will not be able to dictate policy and start his reforms under the regency of his old mentor is too much. Whether for his own personal ambition or for his country’s well being is the debate of centuries of historians to follow, but it is certain that Alexious harbored extreme dissatisfaction with John and his potential policies.

As John flees to the Macedonian countryside, he manages to gain the support of the Aydinid Beylik and the Latin Barons in Thessaly, Achaea and Athens. He attempts to also gain the recognition of Serbia and Bulgaria, but both sides were currently embroiled in war against the Hungarians to provide any meaningful support. [1] However, the army, drawn mostly from the ranks of the nobility and large landowners, enthusiastically supports him. With such prominent forces, John issues a proclamation demanding entrance to the city or face the wrath of the combined forces of his support. Despite the seemingly large numbers of support, it is a bluff- and Alexios knows it. The Latin Barons don’t have enough men to spare to create an army that can capture the city and Alexios, as the chief admiral of the navy commands the fleets loyalty. And without the Aydinids providing an alternative fleet, Constantinople remains impregnable. Thus he feels it is the perfect time to make his play. A message is dispatched to the Macedonian camp of Kantakouzenos’ army, denying his entrance into the capitol. John’s most overt supporters in the city are quietly reassigned, killed or exiled and the imperial bureaucracy proclaims the emperor’s mother as his regent with the emperor “promoting” Apokaukos to John’s old position. John himself is barred from entry and his army is told to disband.

Word quickly reaches Kantakouzenos that he is no longer allowed in the city, that Anna of Savoy has been proclaimed regent and that he has been replaced by his apprentice. Infuriated by this response, and realizing that Alexios has betrayed him, John proclaims himself co-emperor and with the army’s support begin’s a march to the city, hoping that with a show of force he can pressure the Regency forces to submit. His declaration is taken as a pretender to the throne, and war is formally declared. Lines are drawn, supporters rally to their sides and the empire holds its breath as the conflict begins.

Quickly, most of the powerful and large landowners (collectively known as the dynatoi) throw their lot with Kantakouzenos, seeing in him as ‘their own’ fighting to protect their interests against the ‘upstart’, Alexios Apokaukos, while the cities back the regency. This has the curious effect in which many of the ordinary peasants begin to rally around the regency. Perhaps it is the notion of “a Good emperor” who will deliver them from their toils? Perhaps because “One of them” is finally at the top? Maybe because its a chance to strike against their abusers? Perhaps a mixture of all. Whatever the reason, Alexius’ popularity grows in response- something he quickly takes note. War has begun and the fate of the empire rest of his hands.

[1] This event here is our POD. Without Serbian support, Kantakouzenos’ position is drastically weakened. In addition, it is worth noting that John struck a deal with the barons, integrating their lands under the Byzantine state in exchange for respecting their lands and rights. A testament to his diplomatic prowess that he would have been able to restore most of Greece to Byzantine control with a stroke of a pen in a year when the state had been trying the same for almost 200 years.

 

[Deleted member 67076]

In most circumstances, having the rich and powerful of a society against you is a death sentence. For one Alexios Apokaukos, its an opportunity to eliminate your opposition in one go and cement control. For while John could pull a good bluff, Alexios knew how to counter that with the use of an excellent propaganda campaign. Upon hearing the news that many nobles publically announced their support for John, Apokaukos’ first decision was simply to officially confiscate the oppositions’ assets (estates, properties, businesses, etc), and any wealth they left in the capital and the surrounding countryside that had been under Regency control. Following that, he made the fortunes, whatever they may be, of whatever opposition that remained outside his control (most of Macedonia and Greece) public knowledge, with heralds being paid to focus on spreading this news in the poorest areas under regency control. [2] (As a highly influential player in the bureaucracy, the man had access to the records of nearly every landowner. Where the land was, how much it was worth, and who owned what.) Following that, he declared each and every one of them an enemy of the state and declare their lands all confiscated and that the lands would be given to the loyal people of the empire, with a preference to the loyal soldiers of the regency.

The result was exactly as he expected. The poor, destitute from the abuses of the aristocracy flocked to his side in droves, swelling the army to numbers that would have been unfathomable a few years ago. Within a few weeks, Alexios gained an army. An angry, bloated, undisciplined, untrained, and under equipped army, but an army nonetheless.

This spread of knowledge continued outside the countryside. Both by herald and word of mouth, the imperial decrees that told the landowners were free game spread far and wide. The Regency forced had hoped to fan the flames of rebellion however way they could. Thus they began to up their message, painting the aristocracy as abusive, greedy, out of touch and disloyal denizens who would seek to take away the one true emperor who was willing and able to aid his subjects. This was followed by Alexios pressuring Patriarch John into excommunicating the Regency’s opponents and using the church as a tool of mobilization. The likening to the aristocracy to hated figures such as Judas, for example, was common. All of this worked… better than it should have.

What began as a method to bolster their numbers and demoralize their opponent's base soon became a full fledged revolution. Anti Aristocratic revolts popped up left and right in the coming years. Mobs of peasants and urban workers demanding change attacked landed estates, seizing their land dividing it among themselves. Extreme polarization of the population occurred on an unprecedented scale. Either one was with us or with them. ‘Anti-Kantakouzenism’ became the rallying cry of many, and anyone who was accused of it would face their wrath. They took to the streets, demanding change. And if they cannot be given it… they took it.

Alexios had hoped to direct the rage and repression of the urban masses to support his position by providing a cheap source of soldiers. Instead he ignited a revolution. [3]

[1] All of this is OTL.

[2] Alright I want to clear this up right now. When the term ‘Revolution’ is used, its best for you not to think “Russian Revolution”. Better you think “German Peasants revolt of 1524”. There are going to be similarities with both but please do not think this is just having Socialism in the 1300s. I use revolution because purple prose is fun.

 

[Deleted member 67076]

Great stuff so far. I'm sure it will get more...interesting...before it gets better.

But without Kantakuzini screwing around and with angry peasants in arms everywhere, quick takeover of the Empire is off the table. It won't be quick.

Yeah this won't be a quick war of a couple weeks. No aristocracy gives up their power earlier. Fortunately, the peasants have 2 things on their side: fanaticism and numbers.

Logical (the Byzantine Senate was controlled by the aristocrats, the only social class which could maybe produce some republican opposition), but regrettable. Beside this particular timelime: I wonder if the Byzantine were aware of the little, not very important fact that the empire, the whole base of the Byzantine state was built under and by a republic, which was the state of their ancestors? Nevertheless, I admit that the medieval republics to which a Byzantine could refer, were little and annoying ennemies of the empire's power and more a plague than an actual lighthouse of temperate, popular government.

Nice. Apokaukos' aim to raise an army has spun out of control. This is probably going to lead to some heavy infighting once the nobles are either completely overthrown or a compromise is reached.

Oh yeah, there's no doubt about it. Its a bit ironic that once the government wins it won't be in complete control despite all the work the Regency forces have put in to cement control. Ive already mentioned the Zealots of Thessalonica as one major faction that comes up, but it won't be the only one.

I'd very much appreciate guesses at who or what group or social strata could amass power in the aftermath of the Civil War.

Shevek would probably consider this timeline 'reactionary', despite the fact that this is actually pretty dang progressive. True, the Byzies don't like the idea of democracy because it's aristocrat-dominated, and (no offense meant) I think AAoM's 'Sub-legal Absolutionism' is ASB, but at least the economic aspects of the Empire in this timeline are more slanted towards meritocracy and the lower classes...or will be once the civil war is done.

Dunno if I'd call this reactionary, at least not in the economic sense for the time. As for the political sense? I dunno, a Prussia style government could be in the works (except replace the Junkers with something like the Scholar-Bureaucrats of China)


--------


Anyways, I figured you guys have gone too long without seeing the POD, so here it is:

However, Rome’s unmolested metamorphosis could only be allowed thanks to events that prevented the intervention of its neighbors. Thus, while not the catalyst of this events, a good deal of responsibility for the events that unfolded following the death of Andronikos were the actions of the then king of Hungary, Charles. Therefore, let us turn the clock back a few years to 1336. Hungary (or more accurately its king Charles) was at the time embroiled in war with its neighbors and vassals. Yet again.

At the time, the Hungarians were at war with the Serbians to the south due to the latter’s clash with the Banate of Bosnia, a Hungarian satellite. During the year, Charles decided to invade Serbia to aid his Bosnian vassal/ally. Initially successful in invading the Serbian state, his advanced crawled to a halt as the terrain grew more and more rugged the further south he went, allowing the Serbs to reorganize and pull off a successful guerilla defense. With the Serbs striking at supply lines, launching ambushes and grinding down the morale, the Hungarians were in a tight spot. Growing ever more bolder, the Serbs began to launch raids at high profile targets, attempting to kill captains, nobles and even King Charles himself at one point. During that fateful attempt, the king was unfortunately struck by an arrow. Charles was forced into a hasty retreat back north where the bulk of his forces resided. Despite the best treatment of the day, the close call forced Charles died of infection several days afterword. [1] When the news reached the capital, turmoil reigned.

Hungary had been left in the hands of his ten year old son Louis. A regency council was cobbled together, but the damage had already been done. Serbia has taken the incentive and pushed onwards into Bosnia with the attempt of taking the disputed region of Hum. Capturing town after town, the Serbs progressed with little initial difficulty, forcing peace with the Bosnians by the spring of 1337. Hum would be ceded to Serbia and the Serbian friendly Vladislav Nikolic, lord of Popovo Polje was put to rule the Banate of Bosnia. But that’s not it, in the midst of Hungary’s chaos, one Mladen Subic of Croatia rebels and seizes the Banate of Croatia for himself to restore his family’s power. Despite claiming loyalty to the Hungarian king, the actual Hungarian influence of the sub-kingdom was removed, leaving Croatia de facto independent for the time being. And to add to the list of troubles, Venice jumps in attacking and capturing segments of Dalmatia.

Back on the domestic front, the various nobles who had been chafing under Charles’ centralization of the state rise up once more. Although drastically diminished in power, they hope that the disorganization of home would aid them in their endeavor. At the same time, they seek a pretender to give legitimacy for their claim. John of Luxemburg, the current king of Bohemia with ties to the Hungarian throne fits that criteria nicely. With a bit of convincing, he agrees to challenge Louis. Bohemia promptly invades opening yet another front.

WIth all this on his plate, young Louis had his work cut out for him. In the ensuing remainder of the decade Hungary’s massive army (the majority of which loyal to the establishment) worked to quash revolts, enforce vassalage, repel invaders and keep the peace as much as it could, with mixed results. The ensuing civil war, seen as the most pressing issue by the king’s mother and de facto ruler, was ended relatively quickly after 3 years of fighting thanks to the results of the previous rounds of reforms. Said reforms did wonders in ensuring the royal family would always have an advantage in resources over the nobility in terms of land, money and manpower in addition to dramatically weakening the people’s loyalty to any baron via the former’s honor system.

The Magyar kingdom would eventually overcome it obstacles and restore order in the homefront by 1342 followed by pushing out the Bohemians and making a favorable peace but exhaustion and near bankruptcy had set in before it could do anything else. The government knew it could not afford another war in Wallachia, let alone with Serbia and Venice so it conceded defeat. Hum was recognized as Serbian territory and various ports and islands on the Dalmatian coast were tentatively recognized as Venetian territory followed by a truce being signed by all parties. Hungary had whethered the storm, despite leaving the war weaker than at its start. It would be time for the wounds to heal, but for now the kingdom had earned its rest.

[1] This is our POD. IOTL Charles was wounded by an arrow but survived. Here, he does not, throwing Hungary into chaos and prompting Stefan Dusan to focus his energies north into Bosnia. This has repercussions down the road that prevent Dusan from interfering with in the upcoming Roman Civil War.

 

[Deleted member 67076]

I remember being PMed about this. Glad it's finally coming to fruition, and rather nicely I might add. As much fun as the internal politics of the empire are, with this PoD I'm actually far more interested in their future relationship with Anatolia, given that the Beyliks are still disunited and potentially interested in diplomacy with the empire, rather than being dominated by a state that considered Constantinople their manifest destiny.

Thanks! I as well am very interested in the development of the Beyliks, seeing as how they were developing in rapidly different directions overall prior to the Ottoman conquest.

Even if he can't participate in the civil war Dusan should be an interesting force in the region later on, and I rather wonder what's in store for Bulgaria. If anything they were the only state in the region with worse problems than the Romans, so whether they manage to right themselves or are conquered or partitioned should be an interesting side plot.

Dusan orientation is now mostly going to be focused on the Northern Balkans and against Hungary rather than the empire, so

This is a huge blessing in disguise for the Bulgarians. Their frontiers are secure and all potential hostiles have been neutralized for the time being, giving the state a massive amount of breathing room. Byzantium and Wallachia are both allied are likely to stay that way thanks to the magic of realpolitik. Ivan Alexander does have his work cut out for him though, but with that breathing room he should be able to somewhat centralize Bulgaria after dealing with the nobility and turning into a regional powerhouse after a decade or 2- maybe 3.

Second that praise on a nice POD. A relatively minor event that one would not see as having much of an impact on the transformation of the Byzantines. Bravo Sov.

Most internal PODs rarely do anything to neutralize outside threats so I figured why not go with one that will?

Basically, the aristocracy will be seen (in Rome) as a greedy force that only a strong Emperor can curb. Thus, they may argue, a dictatorship is much more free than a Republic. Just like the good old days, when the Basileus would curb the power of the Dynatoi and promote the peasant farmer.

Now that's a fascinating take on the social contract.

Not at all. However, I guess this means the real answer is some completely different faction...hmm. Now I'm even more interested in the next update.

The real faction thats going to be the main opposition party for the regime in next few decades is one that should be pretty obvious (or so I think).

---------

“Alexios has unleashed a lion; let us see if he can tame it.”- Reportedly attributed to John Kantakouzenos upon being captured and tried in Constantinople, 1343.

Knowing his gamble had failed, John attempted to salvage the situation using one other trick up his sleeve: Diplomacy. Stuck in Macedonia, he decided to appeal to the Serbian king Stefan Dusan for aid, promising in return land in Macedonia. This was a sound idea, Serbian forces were talented and well disciplined and could grant him the numbers needed to crush the rabble that rebelled against his authority. Unfortunately, the Serbs were busy dealing with keeping peace in the recently annexed Hum and attempting to put on a strong front against the Banate of Croatia, of which relations had briefly deteriorated with and the threat of war loomed. Thus, Dusan politely declined despite John’s tempting offer.

After that failure, he attempted to appeal to Bulgaria with a similar offer, only to learn the Ivan Alexander had already established relations with the Regency and recognized them as the true Roman government. Thus, he went south and managed to obtain the support of the Latin Barons, gaining an extra 1,000 or so men to aid his campaign. John had also offered the prospect of securing a diplomatic annexation, in which the Latin Barons of Achaea (who had been suffering defeats from the Catalonian controlled Duchy of Athens) agreeing to submit to the Romans as vassals in exchange for a future assault on Athens some time in the future. [1] One final message was sent out to the emir of Aydin, the old friend of John in hopes that he may intervene on John’s end.

With that in mind, the campaign began in earnest in mid to late 1341. Both sides marched towards their opponents, as they were for practically directly opposite from each power base thanks to the reduced state of the empire (essentially reduced to a roughly straight band from Macedonia to Constantinople; not counting the southern portion of the Morea and a small bit of Thessaly). Alexius and his forces moving towards Macedonia where the great estates and the main recruiting ground of Byzantine soldiers lay, and John making his way towards the what has traditionally been a city filled with strong nobility, Thessalonica. Intent on capturing the great city, John makes haste. With his army of roughly 4,000 infantry units backed up by 2,000 cavalry, John and his men start besieging the city in autumn and never letting go, the Pretenders manage to put a good seige. . Unfortunately, they never manage to crack the walls, but do effectively cut off land access in and out of the city. This is nullified to a degree as the Byzantine navy does its best to supply Thessalonica and their supporters within the city.

Thessalonica was important to both sides for many a reason, but especially to Kantakouzenos and his men. It was, following the Imperial restoration in 1261 increasingly filled and dominated by provincial aristocracy, -making it a potentially loyal city-, but more importantly was the second largest city in the empire at the time. It’s population rivaled Constantinople, overflowing with 50,000 residents.[2] It was (despite Italian domination) an important center of trade and had a massive shipyard that could potentially be put to use in building a navy to counter Alexios. (Where John will get the money to do so God only knows, but hey its an option!) along with still being relatively wealthy in comparison to most of the empire. Thus it was critical for both sides to secure. And while the siege of the Pretender began, the Regency forces had used the navy to supply the city for now. Unfortunately this did not last, as the tiny Roman Navy was recalled to protect imperial territory from Aydinid raids in the Aegean, leaving Thessalonica with at most a token garrison. The City was, while officially part of the Regency camp, effectively left alone to deal with its problems.

At the same time, when the navy had entered the city, it brings with it Alexios’ anti-noble propaganda, leading to the establishment of the Zealots of Thessalonica as the major power in the city. Despite Alexius installing his own son John as governor, John only had nominal power and in fact had to share with the city council and the Zealot's leaders. He was given the title of Archon by the city’s residents and made a member of their council to resolve disputes and dictate policy. But any thoughts of absolute control were brutally and swiftly dashed. Meanwhile, the Zealots, fired up by the “Kantakouzenosism” rhetoric, massacre the city’s nobility, before taking their wealth and setting up what was effectively a de facto independent city-state due to lack of Imperial power projection. With the Zealots under control of their own statelet, their rhetoric would be given a testing ground to put into practice…[3]

Following the debacle at Thessalonica, the Civil War further turned into the favor of the Regency forces as the year went on. By June, Regency forces had taken most of Western Macedonia, and by October they had managed to end the siege of Thessalonica and were launching raids into Epirus and Thessaly. Kantakouzenos’ forces, outnumbered and exhausted, were finally broken in outside the ruins of the ancient town of Pella in March of 1343, removing any substantial resistance to Apokaukos’ makeshift army. Sporadic fighting continued up until the end of the year, but all major fighting had ended by the Midsummer. John Kantakouzenos himself was captured at Pella and sent back to Constantinople, where he was tried and summarily executed in the following year.

Why did Alexius’ army, who by all accounts were mostly peasant militia bolstered by the occasional mercenary unit and defectors from the old regime able to crush the Byzantine army, a far more disciplined and well equipped force? There are several reasons for this. The first was numerical disparity. Alexios used his primitive propaganda machine to recruit from the lowest of society, those eager for any chance to improve their standing. Thanks to the general state of impoverishment of his empire, gave him access to a ready pool of soldiers eager to gain land and wealth for them and their families. This was by the time period a rare chance to quickly improve their standing in life and society and many were eager to take it. Thanks to this willing pool of soldiers, the Regency forces were able to absorb losses far, far better than their opponents, who were a relatively small force of less than 10,000 men. Regency forces were able to regularly match, and later on, surpass their enemies in number. As well, this numerical disparity and ability to tank losses let the regency forces strike hard and fast, barely giving the rebels a chance to rest.

The second was psychology. The army of the regency forces was one noted for its zeal and fanaticism, where the thought of obtaining a slice of the wealth of their enemies appealed to poorest of society and made them eager fighters. Whatever discipline their enemies might have had was matched in its effectiveness by the fanaticism of their opponents. It was as they say, a cornered animal is the most dangerous. It also enjoyed a large amount of support in the countryside, thanks to breaking up many a latifundia, killing hated nobles and other wealthy citizens and looting their enemies lands and distributing it to the people. On the other hand, as the war dragged on and news of defeat and the prospect of their estates being ransacked and taken from then, Kantakouzenos’ army struggled to stay focused to their goal. By the second year of fighting, dissertations were a growing problem. Noble officers feared more for their property than the cause they were fighting for, and many made a deal with the new regime, promising their support in exchange for having their lands secured (which, in most cases, Alexios was pragmatic enough to spare them the mob’s fury). Such things further hollowed out the strength of their camp, leading to more victories by the Regency forces, more seizures of land and massacres of nobles, and more desertions in a desperate attempt to starve off the mob. Quite the vicious cycle. Third and lastly were more obvious and boring reasons such as the Regency army being interestingly enough more organized due to having control of the bulk of the imperial bureaucracy back in Constantinople and Thrace, better supplies thanks to the imperial navy, and of course having access to the state funds directly from the imperial treasury.

[1] Yet another OTL thing that he did after getting Serbian support IOTL as a back up plan; a testament of his diplomatic prowess. Unfortunately, IOTL he was not able to get Ivan Alexander’s support, who adamantly supported the Regency forces. (As a big 'fuck you' to the guy. I honestly forgot why, but the Tsar had a huge personal hatred of John Kantakouzenos. Probably due to getting the Turks to direct their naval raids into Bulgaria)

[2] Interestingly most of the nobility in Thessalonica seemed to have stayed loyal, which is why they didn’t immediately open the gates for John and his men. Unfortunately, that was not enough to save them.

[3] The Zealots did a similar thing in OTL due to effectively being cut off by both sides of the civil war for a few years despite nominally being part of the Regency side.

 

[Deleted member 67076]

“Everyone then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25 And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock.”

-The Gospel of Matthew; Chapter 7, Verses 24 and 25.

[Transcript of a Podcast, 15 Byzantine Rulers]

“....What happens next? The war is won, but obviously the job’s not done yet. And this is where I think it gets really interesting. Because Alex has totally eliminated his opponents and is basically left in absolute control. Sure, the empress is regent for a few years until her death by plague but he’s still in charge of most day to day things. There’s no one group that can really stop him, and he knows that. The nobility just got a brutal mauling and the guy’s at the height of his popularity!”

“(Laughs) He rebuilds is what’s next. Then he starts changing things: the economy, the navy, important things. There’s a huge amount of fallout from the war and so many questions being ask of what’s going to happen, but first everybody agrees that the empire has to rebuild. And that isn’t exactly true. Alex can’t just shape the entire country in his own image no questions asked, he’ gotta play by the rules. Remember, he really wants to focus on what he wants; commerce, the economy and the navy, but at the same he needs to make sure that no one can undermine that. From inside and outside. And that means making sure he remains popular and the country stays stronger. So he can’t focus on what he wants just yet.”

“Ok so what does he do?”

“Like I said, he rebuilds and tries to keep the peace. I can’t underestimate just how important this is. It is of the utmost priority. The countryside has been damaged by the war, especially in Macedonia. But at the same time, he reforms. Land is parceled out. Tax rates are changed. The Bureaucracy is reformed. Peasants are encouraged to rebuild the dilapidated cloth industry, which had been in steep decline the last century. But its really that first part that’s the most important, I’d say. Because in the aftermath of the civil war, the imperial state just ended up with the largest increase of land under direct government control in decades. That means they can give out that land to their supporters in small, controllable plots rather than huge estates. So we see the big landed estates of the traitors being cut up and given to his supporters under a modified version of the old Pronoia system. Also helps in keeping the army he made around.”

“Now, what’s this about reform? How deep do the changes go? What’s the imperial policy to the defectors and old nobles?”

“Oh yeah. Alright, so the initial set of reforms basically deal with the bureaucratic and fiscal policy of the empire. Now this did begin during the war but as it continued until after the end of the war I’m including it within the set of reforms that were commonly characterize the Apokaukan reforms. The bureaucracy is given a bit of an overhaul. And by that I mean purge. Much of the old guard with ties to the old establishment is fired, exiled, murdered- whatever is needed to get them out of power. Then, they get replaced by more loyal elements. This is not only with officials, but also to governors and officers in the army. The only exception is Thessalonica, but we’ll get back to that later.

Second is the money situation. Being close to bankruptcy is something the empire has had to deal with on-off for the past century, and one that Alex, as a businessman, is not happy with it at all. How does he try to fix this? First he tries to get more trading going on. Second, he makes more taxpayers by basically giving away land. Giving out land does well to endear the people to the new boss, but that won’t last long if they don’t solve this one huge problem: The Tax Rate. Under the old government, taxes on the lower class were huge. So huge they drove many people to poverty and serfdom. Obviously, that’s not exactly popular, so Alex has to lower the tax rate to a more manageable level. This is, by all accounts a huge reduction in what they paid. Not exactly good for the budget. Thankfully, and this is where the leftover nobles and defectors come in. Alexius is able to raise taxes on what’s left of the big landowners and the nobles and really squeeze them in an attempt to make up the difference. He closes the legal loopholes, most of their financial privileges and tax exemptions and what not. They don’t like it, but he’s at the top of his game now and so they can’t really do anything about it. But most are thankful they still get to keep their lands. Despite all this, its unfortunately, that’s not enough to make up the difference. This isn’t a real reform.”

“Wait. But what about taxing the Church? Taxing them was usually how many people raised money in this time period. Also, why isn’t this enough? The state is taxing more people than it did a decade ago and more efficiently too. We know that small plots of land are easier to tax than big landowners”
“See, the thing is, he can’t do that. The Church, or rather the Patriarch was a supporter of him and his policies, interestingly enough. He can’t alienate that big of a support base. They helped out, and in return, he’s gotta do them a favor. That means not taxing them, restricting their influence in government, things like that. Second, its not enough because Alex isn’t just interested in making things more fair. He wants Rome to be able to compete with Venice, with Genoa, with all the other merchant powers. And that means building up a huge fleet. Only problem is a navy is really expensive. But he’s spending all his money on repairs and reforms and fortifications and what not, there’s not much, if any left over.”

“And how do they deal with that?”

(Laughs) “They don’t really. The Romans just pretty much wait and see for opportunities, quietly saving up money and fortifying until they can find an opportunity to expand their trading, little by little building up their navy and trying to defend against raids from Turkish pirates. Fortunately, they do get a few pretty soon. Grain prices start rising after the Golden Horde closes its ports to foreign merchants in 1343, so the Italians, particularly Venice are forced to buy more of their grain in the empire. Then the Aydinids, their old allies turned enemies, had really annoyed the wrong people with their raids on Christian shipping in the Aegean. It got to the point where eventually the Pope called a crusade to deal with them. Which really speaks more about how cheap crusades were than anything else, but this did elition a coalition of Christian mercenaries to attack the main Aydinid port of Smyrna. The coalition forces smash the Aydinid navy and take the city, denying them naval access for the better part of a year. This is where the Romans get their opening.”

“Mhm”

“Right. Let me explain; while the Crusaders did take the city, they were never able to advance much further and take over the Beylik. At the same time, the Aydinids weren’t strong enough to push them out. That’s when the Romans come in and offer to help them out. Around 1346 or so- the records kinda sketchy- the Romans send out a message offering their support to capture the city of Smyrna and return it to the Bey in exchange for 2 things: A renewal of the old alliance during the reign of Andronikos III, an opening of Smyrna to Roman trade with similar trading quarters like the Italians merchants and tax exemptions for Roman merchants. Umar Bey, the current emir, accepts readily. And so in a few months the city is retaken and the Aydinids now have sea access once more while the Romans leave with a fancy new trade port.”

“That’s amazing. But can we back this up a bit; since you mentioned the importance of the navy, this raises another set of questions: What happened to the armed forces? What’s the navy doing in all this? And the army of the Civil War? Where’s that gone?”
“Couple of things. First off, they get downsized. Now this may seem weird, considering how useful having a large army was in the civil war, but you have to remember, that army was a bloated mess. And an expensive one. So it gets streamlined into a more manageable size. The extra lands are used to help re-institute pronoia and give the empire a steady supply of militia troops. These were mostly set in the border to defend and stall enemies until the main force of professional troops comes in. Nothing too radical per se, standard Early Palaiologoi doctrine. What really changes is the composition. Most of the new officers aren’t nobles with connections in the government, they’re recruited from the lowest classes that served well and were promoted on the basis of merit. As well, the mercenary forces that so categorized Andronicus were paid, disbanded and sent home. Alex hated, hated, hated mercenaries.”

That’s weird, didn’t he use them as well?

“He did in the war, but from his writings he seems to have a huge distaste of using mercenaries, considering them both absurdly expensive and disloyal. It was more efficient to just use militia in his opinion. With that said we do see mercernary use continue, just on a smaller scale. Now, continuing on with the army changes, there’s a bit of a change in army equipment, mostly some standardization, things like more crossbows being used. Now, on to the navy. This is where the things really change. Its upgraded, expanded and just improved overall. By around 1350, there’s a new shiny new fleet of around 35 to 40 warships. Compare this with the 20 or so in 1340. Interestingly enough, much of this is being paid out of pocket by Alexios himself. At one point he spends something like 50,000 hyperpyra on new ships. And it was a wise investment if I say so. Led to the reconquest of reconquest of Naxos and other Aegean islands in the near future. Also paid for itself pretty quickly during the joint raiding operations with the Aydinids and later the Saruhans. Unfortunately, this really annoyed Venice, Genoa and the Latin Crusader states in Greece, but you can’t win them all. Aside from raids, the navy was used to project power, which is why you start seeing things like interferences in Trebizond affairs and deals with Georgia and the Golden Horde.

Alright, last question and this goes back to the peasants: What did the government do with the Zealots of Thessalonica and other radical movements? I mean they were large enough to possibly be considered a threat and were insanely influential. The governments got to have reacted to this somehow.”

“This may seem weird, but not much actually- at least in the first decade or two. And there’s two main theories as to why. The first one is, they are too busy essentially. Basically, as the regime was for the most part too busy reorganizing the state, bureaucracy and the military to pay attention to what is for the most part is just peasants organizing in councils at the municipal level, forming militias to defend the border and occasionally pooling their resources together. It didn’t really hurt anything, and as most of them the radicals were willing to work with the government and pay their taxes, so there was a ‘live and let live’ attitude going around. It does make sense though. As I’ve implied this was a state that in the aftermath of a brutal civil war was organized around Alexious Apokaukos and his aids. Most of the people who would be against this, have been made -for the time being- politically irrelevant; the new people in charge are far more sympathetic to the lowest classes and their position, and in fact you sometimes could see the new government actually help out the peasants just to undermine the status of local aristocrats even more. But even that’s an insane amount of work. Trying to have each and every little group that forms loyal or sidelined was too much for the demands of the state, and they just ignored it until it was too big to ignore.

The second theory -and one that I lean towards too more, but both sides have their merits-, is that the government went along with it because it couldn’t do anything to stop it. Fresh from a civil war and busy trying to recover from a decades long decline, that doesn’t leave a lot of resources to impose Constantinople’s will outside of the bare minimum. And that would just make the empire look even more weak, potentially leading to more invaders coming in and ruining the progress that’s been made so far. Along with that, the army itself is probably stretched thin and made up of people who might just side with the peasants if said peasants get too popular. Due to all of the above, the imperial government took the path of least resistance and let things be. And there’s a huge piece of evidence that supports this view: Thessalonica itself, with the Zealots and their council being in charge for a very long time after being re-instituted in the empire. I mean, the nominal governor, John Apokaukos, was basically a figurehead at worst, a liason at best. Thessalonica did what it wanted and there was almost nothing the government could do to stop it.

Professor, thank you for your time.

Happy to be of service. It was great being here.

 

[Deleted member 67076]

Alright, so these next posts were originally one big post, but it looked 'choppy' to me, so I'm going to slip it up into several updates.

------

It is 1344. After 3 years of a grueling, intense, brutal conflict, the Second Palaiologoi Civil war is finally over. Peace however brief it may be, returns to the Empire of the Romans. And though bloodied from the time of war, the imperium stands united and optimistic; a new era is dawning with fresh minds in charge, ready to meet the needs of a changing world. When the world moves on, Rhomania will not be left behind.

Let us look forward a decade later. We see that after the dramatic upheavals faced in the past few decades that saw catastrophic loss in wealth and men in the empire, things are finally starting to cool down and settle into a more acceptable pace. With popular support, a competent government, and neighbors that were more preoccupied with their own affairs than disrupting the imperials, the Roman empire would finally enter a period of brief, yet vital rest and recovery. During this period, the crucial reforms that had been at the minds of many would be laid out to the benefit of the empire. Said reforms were primarily focused on rooting out the pressing issues that plagued the state: a weak economy, an impoverished tax base, a demolished industry and a nearly nonexistent commercial sector. By the time conflict once again broke out and the empire intervened in the Third Venetian-Genoese War, a new creature had replaced the one the world had come to know.

Nearly every facet of the empire would come to be altered in the decade that had passed since the end of the Second Palaiologian Civil War: Economics, living standards, finances, military readiness, manpower, the navy, the cities, diplomacy, the guilds, and even the church. The Apokaoukan reforms, implemented swiftly in the end of 1343 had done much to restructure the empire in a positive way. Imperial finances had noticeably increased and the destitution that so very much characterized the late empire began to give way little by little. A glimmer of hope appeared in the empire. Please note however, that despite the large progress these changes had, it was still too early for Constantinople to have bounced back to her former glory. The army was tiny, the navy equally so and it was with great difficulty that the imperial coffers were able to be filled. Like a patient just coming into rehabilitation, there was still much more progress to be made, but the worst had passed.

To better grasp at the multitude of development that had occurred, it has been decided to categorize the internal and external modifications of the state by category. Therefore, this update will tackle what has changed on a subject by subject basis.

Finances:

In the efforts at achieving their most pressing needs- a means to increase the wealth of the empire- the Apokaukan reforms were largely successful in achieving that. The policies put in place, such as the establishment of the Imperial Roman Trading Company (a state owned enterprise that ensured government monopoly on external trading) [1] and the expansion of the merchant navy did well to bring in much needed coin.

Especially the latter. The Roman naval expansion (both in terms of warships and the merchant navy) over the past decade was critical in bringing in what Apokaukos had promised:a taste of the wealth that Venice and Genoa enjoyed from trade (and of course, loot from joining in pirate raids- one mustn’t forget about that). This was done by not only increasing the size of the navy and its personnel but also by expanding the presence of Roman merchants primarily in the Aegean and Black Seas. (Roman merchants, like the Venetians in the 11th century seemed to have had a fear of going into places they didn’t know too well) As well, the diplomatic arrangements with the Aydinid Emirate (and by proxy the beylik of Saruhan) ensured that piracy against Roman vessels was at an all time low while providing another excellent source of wealth: Piracy. Roman sailors often joined in with the emirates on raids against Christian shipping in the Aegean. (Later on as the Aydinids grew rich from their plunder and gained better fleets and naval bases of their own, these raids expanded their operations into the Eastern Mediterranean.) A risky yet rewarding proposition.

One must note that yes, this did infuriate the Italian merchants in the region as competition increased, but it fortunately did not lead to war with the Venetians or the Genoese or whoever due to a fortunate combination of external factors. Beginning with the expulsion of the Venetians from the Golden Horde in 1341, relations between the two states had yet again started to plummet and a state of low level undeclared war started up. It was seen as inevitable that a proper war would form, so the two attempted to avoid as many ‘unnecessary distractions’ until the next round of conflict began. In any case, Rome had found her trade presence began to increase, and with the additional money flowing into imperial coffers from this trade, efforts at improving infrastructure, internal trade, industry and agricultural yields.

However, there was another source of important income that came throughout the decade, ironically enough from the Merchant republics that were so often accused of taking away what money should be flowing into Constantinople's coffers. Much like the Regency victory of the Regency faction in the Second Palaiologian civil war, this was not due to any imperial efforts, but rather a pleasant source of international affairs; in 1341, the Khanate of the Golden Horde had banished Venetian Merchants from its realm after a diplomatic crises that resulted in the Venetian Navy attempting to firebomb the Genoese Colonies at the Crimea. While they were largely successful in their goal, many important nobles in the Khanate had been killed. Enraged, the Khan banned all Venetian merchants from his realm and forbid any sales to the merchant republic. [2] What this meant that Venice’s primary source of cheap grain had been cut off, and prices skyrocketed in the city. In responce, Venice had to obtain grain from different sources: Egypt noticeably, but also in fertile areas of Greece and Thrace. Much to the delight of farmers and merchants within the empire, demand for grain had grown considerably, and so had their profits in time. Profits which then flowed into the cities to the eventual benefit of all.

This admittedly raises the question of how did the average person benefit from all this? The answer is very much. As previously stated, the average peasant in the Late Roman Empire was much more poorer than his counterpart in say, 1000 AD. Crippling high taxes, frequent wars that led to economic disruption, poor infrastructure, and reduction in average field sizes had led a very sizable reduction in GDP per capita. With the ease in the tax burden and generous land reform policy, the troubles that had plagued the peasants began to go away. To the average peasant, this was a Godsend and easily the greatest period to be living in for a lower class Roman since the Late Komnenoi, maybe even the Macedonian Dynasty. With their tax rate finally decreased (although not that much, lowering taxes to a non oppressive rate would bankrupt the state, still it was a noticeable decrease that allowed them to save some coins) and a generous land reform policy sponsored by the imperial government, the chance of renting and owning land skyrocketed. But there lies one more benefit in this period, and that is a rise in wages. Because just like nearly everywhere else in Europe, with the passing of the Black Plague came a labor shortage that meant demand for labor increased. And when demand increases, prices rise. [3] The culmination of all these factors meant an increase in the standard of living for the oppressed masses.

Apokaukos’ government had gambled that having access to a larger tax base via land distribution, confiscation of property, land sales and trade increases would be enough to make up for the ease in the tax burden in the long run. And in this case, it worked out. Rising grain prices, shrinking poverty, a tightening of legal loopholes and tax exemptions, and the increase in trade both in the empire and outside it allowed the empire to managed to obtain much needed funds in ways that did not involve brutalizing the lower classes. And with the government placated for the time being (and still fearful of revolution against the new boss) the lower classes were left alone to prosper. And slowly yet surely they did. These effects would take decades to be fully realized, but every year led to more and more growth, and therefore more and more wealth piling up.

The government on the other hand was a bit less enthusiastic. The simple reason for that is despite all of the new laws and strategies and government actions, there simply wasn’t as much of a gain for the empire as originally expected. While yes, the initial phase of the Renovation did great with land reform and establishing the navy, as well as increasing the amount of troops these things didn’t give the government what it really wanted: a larger treasury. State funds were indeed higher, but due to a myriad of factors (mainly rising costs in supporting the navy and attempting to refortify) they weren’t that much higher than the last days of Andronikos II, and therefore, criminally underfunded. The Black Death and its robbing of taxpayers would see to that. Combined with all the other projects that the state had in mind meant that the Roman state was increasingly desperate for cash and had to resort to more... unorthodox methods of obtaining wealth. Mainly, this was done through looting; either from attacking shipping, or raiding someone else like a beylik or Latin crusader states.

This does in turn raise of could the empire get away with that? The answer is with some ingenious diplomacy and underhanded tactics. Recall that after the Smyrniote Crusade, the Beylik of Aydin had once more regained control of Smyrna thanks to Roman aid. In exchange for this, the alliance between the two powers was renewed and trading rights were obtained. Thanks to this, Roman sailors and ships would be able to join in on Aydinid raids all across the Aegean Sea, the Black Sea and the Mediterranean, bringing in some much needed coin to the coffers back in Constantinople. Even better, thanks to often joining in the Aydinids, Byzantine sailors were able to walk away from the raids without Constantinople being suspected of involvement in many cases. This of course was a highly risky proposition and at several times inflicted retribution from other powers, but the Romans managed to stay under the radar most of the time. Thanks to the combination of all the above factors, imperial finances managed to be *relatively* stable for the next decade.


[1] The Roman Empire had a disdain for capitalism in general, but overall it seemed to have an avid distaste for what we would call corporations; judging on how hostile writers were to the Genoese, who ran their trading as private enterprise. This, combined with a government that is paranoid on keeping its monopoly on wealth and power, stands to reason that should they try to expand into the realm of capitalism, would do so in a manner they’d feel safest about.

[2]: Happened in OTL and yes the Venetians did start buying from the Empire. Also ITTL, the rather brutal purge of nobility, their drastic weakening in terms of monetary assets and general population loss means people in the empire just aren’t spending as much money on Venetian luxury goods such as cloth and spices (a major source of income for Venice OTL). This means that in addition to having to spend more money on their enemies, the Venetians are making less of a profit from the Romans. Not a favorable trade balance and not one they can really rectify with war.

[3] This also has the wonderful effect of slowing down old displaced nobles from bouncing back so quickly as their would be serfs and tenants now have much more bargaining power.

 

[Deleted member 67076]

Moaar! I like where you are going

You're probably going to love what happens after the 1380s then, both in Bulgaria and around the world.

-----------

Diplomacy and Foreign Policy

Alexios Apokaukos had always been an intelligent man; someone who was usually savvy enough to know where the wind was blowing. Therefore, when he started undertaking his massive overhauls to the imperial state, it was with the knowledge that he had to make sure that the empire was secure enough to undergo its metamorphosis without any... unnecessary distractions. Not a single hyperpyra must be wasted on any wars of defense. Here diplomacy and soft power were the key to obtaining imperial security. Steps must be taken to ensure the peace needed for reform. With that in mind, let us look to how the empire dealt with her neighbors and rivals in the immediate years following the war.

Despite how we now know the greatest threat to the empire were the Turkish Beyliks and the Italian merchant republics, the peoples at the empire lacked the benefit of hindsight. They believed that it was the traditional neighbors of the empire in the Balkans were the largest potential damage and thus, received the largest bits of immediate attention and placating.

Therefore, a reaffirmation of the treaty with Bulgaria under the Tsar Ivan Alexander was confirmed and a marriage alliance was negotiated with young John V to be wed to Ivan Alexander’s daughter, Kera Tamara (when both came of age, of course). The Bulgarian Tsar accepted these terms relatively easily due to growing conspiracy in his own nation that he need to turn his attention towards- where in which the Bolyars of his realm had been planning to revolt. With Serbia fearing Hungarian invasion under their new king Louis and a friendly Wallachia to the North, Rhomania was the only potential source of aggression, and with this treaty that would be taken care of. But the treaty did more than merely secure peace: trade between the empires once more began to reach a respectable level, and the peace ensured allowed for easier development of the frontier regions.

The other important threat to the empire (on land at least), Serbia, was dealt with very carefully. Serbia, under the great king Stefan Dusan, had managed to rapidly expand northwards at the expense of Hungary, carving out a small sphere of influence in Croatia, Dalmatia and the unannexed parts of Bosnia. These additional resources and the appearance of a well trained Serbian military stemming from reports of Hungarian losses promulgated by Serbian propaganda led to Constantinople to treat the Serbs as a very dangerous threat. Should Stefan Dusan at any time decide to march south, when Rome had not yet recovered from her decline, the results would be disastrous. Countermeasures must be taken to ensure the stability of the realm. For the time being this meant do as little as possible to not antagonize the Serbs at any cost while trying to find a good partner to counter them. Hungary, being the obvious choice, but also Bulgaria was considered.

Now, that leaves a few other states that bordered the empire: Epirus, which in the chaos of war had managed to partially break free from imperial domination; the Duchy of Athens currently under the control of a Catalan aristocracy; and the principality of Achaea. (For our purposes the Aegean is not being considered in this case, rest assured the Duchy of Naxos has not been forgotten) All 4 were, collectively speaking, small, decentralized principalities with weak economies and under the control of an elite that was mostly unpopular amongst its subjects. In theory, they should have been prime subjects for conquest. But reality has never been that simple. Repeat attempts and raids against the Latin Crusader states of Greece has taught the Romans that despite their weakness, they were still powerful enough to withstand full on invasions, yearly raids and a rapidly shrinking pool of soldiers, a testament to their stubbornness and how terrible the imperial military was at the time. So another direct round of campaigns to reconquer former territory was discarded- at least for the time being. Instead Eastern Rome would try a more roundabout approach following the years after second Palaiologian war. Weakening their opponents as much as possible, using whatever means it can, before attempting to attack them. This was, curiously enough, not a conscious set of policies but more of a reaction to attempting to copy the Italian states, who also dominated the region using economic and political leverage. Roman travellers would note that Italian merchants frequently sold goods in Greece proper at very low prices, often lower than what it would cost if consumers bought locally. Economics dictated that these practices of dumping led to an undermining of native industries and a good deal of money entering the coffers of the merchant states. And if tariffs were ever decreed, the Italian states would intervene and ‘convince’ the rulers to see the status quo was for the best.

Thus, the Eastern Roman Empire did what they could over the years to bring back a similar level of hegemony for the time being. Peace was secured with the states (sans Athens), under a similar level of friendship the late Kantakouzenos had planned, but this time with an emphasis on opening up trade rather than levying soldiers in the time of need. The states did agree to the deal, viewing it as nothing that could really harm them too much. Little did they know that this further hollowed out their debased economies as the Romans could just as easily dump goods into their region and at even lower prices than what the merchant republics offered thanks to smaller shipping and transportation costs. And since the Roman economy had undergone a tremendous amount of damage and debasement, any and all goods sold still made a profit. (This of course, one must note, was not a sustainable policy. As time went on, the costs of labor rose such that economic sectors were losing money in selling their goods at lower prices than they what they cost to make and people began to agitate to the government in ceasing this. But by then the Crusader states had outlived their usefulness anyway...)

The next major group Roman diplomacy focused a large part following the implementation of the Renovation was the two Italian Merchant Republics: Genoa and Venice. Both sides straddled the Eastern Mediterranean as giants, sapping up as much wealth and trade as they could sense and intervening whenever they could to obtain the best outcome for themselves. Here in the Aegean, this was not different, and in fact their success in the realm of commerce was what prompted the Renovation in the first place. Genoa and Venice controlled the bulk of the revenue that came in from the Silk Road terminals this far east, and as such the new regime viewed them with respect and with fear. Apokaukos, keenly aware of the power of the two realized that antagonizing any one of them was suicide. Roman policy was, in word: Mollify. The new regime, in a drastic change from their predecessors realized they were no longer the big fish in the small pond. To antagonize any one of the two major powers, especially at their own game, would be tantamount to suicide and a drastic blow to any plans of reviving imperial power. Such is that the Romans did all they could to stay on the two Italians good sides. Keeping tariffs low (or nonexistent), trading in places where the Italians tended to avoid/had less of a presence in (places like Aydin, Candar, Georgia and Circassia, and as the Romans got bolder Tunis and the Maghreb), and trading much less where in which the Romans and the Italians both frequented as such to not undermine their profit margin. As one would expect this was a policy that was costly for the imperials and perhaps unnecessary, but in the aftermath of a brutal civil war combined the state feeling insecure of itself in commercial endeavors, this was seen as the safe option. And perhaps, to an extent- it worked. Once more, the goal of peace was achieved: War did not break out until the Roman intervention in the Third Venetian-Genoese trade war. But at the same time, going out to lesser places did have a nice impact of giving the merchants new contacts and new markets. The trading between the Marinids and the Romans following the former’s conquest of Ifriqiya was a large boon to both, giving to the Romans buyers as far south as the Sahelian states and the Berbers a healthy profit being the middlemen between the two.

Finally, we move on the last major recipients of Roman diplomatic policy worth being discussed: The Anatolian Beyliks. As the conquerors of the former heartlands of the empire, there was a special… distaste towards these particular states. Normally the initial response would be to send in troops and reconquer the region. But dire circumstances force upon a necessary pragmaticism, and this was certainly no different a time. The Beyliks of Anatolia, much like the rest of the Saracens in occupied Roman territory, were agents the needed to be dealt with on a case by case basis depending on what would best aid the empire. Here, it was money and security that was needed. And allies are the greatest suppliers of both. Let us look then to the coastal beyliks, the ones in which the imperials have had the most contact with and to be honest, the ones they care about most. Here we have two in which deserve distinction: The Aydinids, and the Ottomans

One might already know that in 1347 the so called Smyrniote Crusade was launched at the Aydinids to end their pirate raids and though briefly successful, Roman intervention put an end to that dream. The Aydinids got back their port, and the Emir was thankful enough to resume diplomatic relations with the man who killed his best friend. Trade began anew, as did the piracy raids, this time with the Romans offering to join in. Perhaps the greatest foreign policy decision of its time, with this a highly value ally was obtained that provided free experience for its sailors, a bulwark against the Ottomans and in the words of one Venetian admiral in the late 14th century “A loyal and vicious attack dog” (no doubt a reference to Roman diplomacy often having quite the impact on who the Aydinids decided who was their next raiding target). The Empire fostered excellent relations with this state whenever it could and eagerly directed its raids to whoever it hated, along with encouraging the Aydinids to increase their fleet and naval prowess as much as it could. The ramifications of these actions would not be seen for quite a while, and can be rightly criticized as short sided but for the time being, it was of immensely beneficial to both sides. Certainly highly useful in the future clashes with the Ottoman Beylik.

Which leads us into our next topic of relations: The Ottoman Beylik. One of the largest, most recent and perhaps most importantly, well organized states in Anatolia, this had been the greatest thorn in the side to the Roman Empire during the reign of Andronicus III. They had taken the tremendously lands of Western Anatolia where the largest source of tax revenue was generated. The great cities of Nicea, Nicomedia and Bursa had all been stolen from the imperials by the Ottomans. Rome harbored an immense hatred of this state, and this reflected in its policy. When not fortifying their half of the straits, Rome did all it could to sabotage the Ottomans. Using its relations with the nearby Saruhan, Aydin and Candar, the Imperial government formed an unofficial coalition against Ottoman aggression. Initially met with some skepticism, the conquest of the Karesids altered the emirs that despite the Ghazis having run out of Christian land to take, war was far from over. Following a period of consolidation and organization, Muslim lands, their lands, would be next. It is by that fear (along with recent economic prowess and a rise in prestige) in which the Romans, bound and isolated the Ottomans from most of her immediate neighbors, attempting to sap as much strength and goodwill before starting up a war of conquest where at the time all sides would go and receive a slice of the beylik. A tempting offer indeed: a plan of mutual protection, co-operation and eventual prospering of eliminating a common foe, but as a certain allohistorical poet would say, ‘the best laid plans of mice and men often go awry.’

 

[Deleted member 67076]

I like this TL a lot, it's very plausible, but I hope you make it realistic instead of a straight up wankery. Would love if the Romans get punched in the face repeatedly and even have multiple setbacks rather than just steadily steamrolling everything, it's all more enjoyable with some proper struggle.

Thanks.

I'm really trying to avoid wanking any one country and or side, and hopefully the upcoming wars and shifts in power will display that. I mean there are many, many openings in this period for rapid growth in power for any one side (see the Ottomans' and their massive growth during the time of Murad) so there is an argument to be made, but I highly doubt it'll come to that. The circumstances are somewhat different and the diplomatic situation already works against that (treaties with Bulgaria, attempting economic warfare and soft power, etc)

They get punched in the face soon, what with the hints that their plans for the Osmanlis would fail spectacularly.

I plead the fifth.

I sense some Anatolian adventures in the future. Here's hoping it goes better than with Kantakuzini (I mean it has to, doesn't it, even if it's not a straight success?)

Well, better than OTL is a very small bar to pass. An attempt at reconquering Anatolia is inevitable, its too valuable to just abandon. How successful, is up for grabs.

And yes, Venice needs to get smacked on the nose (incidentally big cities were net drains on population in the era, without cheap grain Venice is always in the brink of disaster. OTOH they always managed to survive).

They're already on the set course for that looking at OTL. Prior to Chioggia there were lots of diplomatic failures in Venice which allowed Genoa to get in the upper hand and lots of allies during that war. There's no reason that'll be different with a Byzantine empire that doesn't undergo its rapid decline.

The Domestic situation (cities, church, the Zealots of Thessalonica, etc) is up next next and then we move on the Third Venetian-Genoese trade war.

----------

Military

Ah, the Imperial Military. The remnant and successor to an ancient tradition of war nearly 2000 years old. From the founding of the ancient city of Rome, the state has needed men to both protect and grow her holdings. Here, in the aftermath of a brutal civil war, this fundamental fact remains. But the details of how that army is to be managed, and how it shall be developed, are of course debatable.

Fittingly enough with the reformist doctrine now espoused by Eastern Rome, the army, traditionally being the most attended to organ of the Roman state, was no longer the major focus of the state’s energies and attention. That honor now went to the navy, and to a lesser extent the state bureacracy. Instead the army was mostly left alone, to replenish itself with no real major reforms following aside from a change in the army's composition. This may seem odd but we when we must look at this from the state’s perspective: The army’s been tamed and is loyal the establishment, the state’s credible enemies of Bulgaria and Serbia are in the case of the former allied, and the latter simply not in the mood for future wars, still digesting its gains in Bosnia and fortifying as much as it can. The young king Louis of Hungary has been making some overtures about ‘reclaiming what is rightfully his’, and with the news of his victory against the myriad of forces against him, it was not unreasonable to assume his army must have been large, experienced and well disciplined- something the Serbs would fear. Thus, consolidation and fortification is the agenda. At the same time, the peace ensured with the Latin states and the isolation of the duchy of Athens gives some much needed breathing room, while the navy of course is what’s needed to defend against Genoa and Venice. Thanks to all of the above, the government decided the military wasn’t in any need to change.

When one does look towards the development of the military in this period of the late 1340s-early 1350s, one sees a change in the composition of the army, and there’s a very good reason as to why. From the time since the ascension of Michael VIII, the Roman armed forces had had a preference of recruiting from the nobility and other classes. This was not unreasonable; the nobility usually had the money and resources needed to make sure that the individual soldier was reasonably well equipped, had a horse, and could have afforded to buy military manuals and receive tutelage in the arts of war to some degree or another.

But as we’ve noticed, the trade off was immense: the nobility often stuck its nose in political affairs of the state, were less fierce in their resistance to invading forces due to having more land to return to in the end, demanded higher pay, etc, etc. Due to all of the above, Apokaukos desire to micromanage (therefore necessitating people who are less likely to mess around), and frankly, a shortage of nobles, the army began to be staffed from the lower classes. This began during the civil war and accelerated in the years after. There were simply too many benefits to not allow peasants to staff the army including but not limited to getting a larger amount of willing recruits, being willing to work for cheaper pay (allowing the government to slash prices on army pay on regular soldiers with minimal complaints), re-installation of the pronoia contracts with government land confiscated from the vast noble estates during the war (this one was actually a late term decision due to Constantinople realizing it was quickly running out of small plots of land; it had been giving them out like candy in an attempt to increase patronage; but thankfully the Black Death robbed many would be inheritors and started another round of land parcelling, this time under more careful watch) and of course not having to pay ransoms. This rapid change in composition was something that mostly applied to infantry however, as the remnant nobility, having access to the funds needed to buy and pay for the upkeep in horses, were too valuable to be purposefully disposed of.

In any case, all of above factors were essential in being able to grow the military to a small yet sizable level of around 10,000 infantry troops, a noticeable increase from the pre-war level of c. 6,000 men. Conversely, cavalry suffered and declined from around c. 3,000 men to c. 2,000 (at best) men. With this in mind the imperial government did what it could to make sure its troops could defend themselves all while staying under budget. And that means making sure the equipment was in good quality, good condition and well stocked. To do this the state began buying large amounts of iron and other ores from their neighbors and abroad- Bulgaria and the Marinid Sultanate primarily. While there were certainly sources closer to home (Venice, Genoa and the Greek Crusader states come to mind), some of these conflicted with imperial policy of denying as much income as possible to enemies and thus weren’t considered.

On the logistical side of things, not much had changed except for greater investment in that section. As part of the policy towards promoting commerce, roads and other forms of infrastructure were rebuilt, repaired and expanded in order to make sure merchants and other people could move throughout the empire and sell their wares without much trouble. The military potential of this was not lost, and in fact one of the largest supporters of improving infrastructure were the military elites. This was because it played into the standard military doctrine of the time, emphasizing rapid deployment of troops in order to make sure whatever militia or contingent in the needed region would receive the necessary backup. As we know, Roman forces in this time period were small and stretched thin, thus every man counted. It was imperative to make sure the numbers were even to make the odds better.

And speaking of evening the odds, the Roman government, whenever possible did take steps to increase the defensiveness of its frontiers. Fortifications were built in Thessaly, Macedonia and the straights. It did not confiscate the arms given to the peasantry during the civil war, and made steps to move much of the unemployed urban poor back out into the frontier as militia troops with land grants and military contracts. And these settlers themselves took steps to ensure their livelihoods, organizing into militia groups and in some cases communes (many of the relocated poor were from Thessalonica, where the Zealot Theology had taken root), and with the improvements in roads, large purchases in weapons.

 

[Kosta]

Some weirdo from Cuba or Haiti or somewhere sent me an email that said if I post this update and send in $5,000 to a holding company in Lagos, I get 20% of the Princess of Nigeria's inheritance. Let's hope this works!

Urban Culture and other Domestic Developments​

On the surface, what occurred to the urbanization of the Roman Empire seems to be a depressing affair. Urbanization rates dropped substantially in the 1340s-50s, with some cities such as Thessalonica falling to a ‘paltry’ 30,000 at times and Constantinople dropping to around 40,000- a mere shadow of its former glory when the city harbored 200,000 souls. Cities across the empire were shrinking as people flocked to the countryside. But in practice things are never that easy. In fact if you asked the average Roman bureaucrat what he thought of people moving out into the countryside, he’d think its a good thing. More people to work the lands, defend the frontier, mine, and otherwise do something productive with their lives. Although, we’re getting ahead of ourselves. First of all, why is the number dropping so fast? Why doesn’t the government doing anything about it?

Pretty simple really. Its 2 things, the change in the domestic situation, and this wonderful thing called the Black Death. As you probably know by now, just a few years ago most of the prospects for owning land were relatively low. Various powerful families own most of the land, people were on average poor even by the standards of Medieval Europe, an attempt at creating serfdom, and other economic factors that tended to create a large amount of urban poor. By 1345, that’s all gone. The latifundia have been broken up, the government is giving out land on an unprecedented scale, wages are rising, taxes have been slashed and anyone who might try to press you into not quite serfdom has either fled or been killed. This is a huge opportunity. Predictably, people took it.

The second is this wonderful we know as the Black Death. A transfer of bubonic plague from Asia into Europe in the late 1340s, it ravaged its way across the continent, taking with it c. ⅓ of the population by the start of 1350. Rome, being very urbanized for its time, with many of its cities having less than adequate sewage systems (lack of funds is a terrible thing to have) was one of the worst places hit by the plague. In cities, plague spread rapidly and mercilessly. As such, people eventually made the connection that cities were unsafe places to be and migrated into the countryside setting up their farms and small towns. The new round of land grants that began after the fallout of the Black Death was yet another incentive to move away from the towns. This was especially noticeable in Thessalonica, which had the most drastic drop in population. Many of the urban poor fled the city in droves, taking with them the radical theology they had come to know and support. The so called ‘Zealots of Thessalonica’ was at the forefront of exporting radical doctrine to the masses.

And speaking of Thessalonica, the city’s character once more changed throughout the 1340s. When the pro regency forces conquered the city, they discovered one much different than what they had come to know. Pre Civil War Thessalonica was an aristocratic dominated shipyard where due to a variety of factors, came to house the largest concentration of nobility outside Thrace and Constantinople. It had, since the fall of Nicaea, shifted into the second city of the empire with a thriving shipyard and industry. However, as previously mentioned, Thessalonica was filled to the brim with poor residents, many of whom made a meager living as dockworkers, fishermen, servants and other such lower class professions. Living in sight of such opulence yet having these riches constantly out of their grasp, the lower classes were a fertile and receptive ground for anything willing to challenge the balance of power. Therefore, when the Zealots of Thessalonica began to organize and take the streets, preaching equality for all, they workers eagerly took to it.

For those who are not familiar, the Zealots of Thessalonica were a popular movement originating during the Second Palaiologian Civil War espousing a radical theology that took Christ’s teaching of social justice to what many had seen as the logical extreme. Rather than simply providing to the poor, the Zealots espoused what allohistorically one would call socialism. They demanded a radical redistribution of wealth amongst which everyone would receive a fair share of resources. In a time when the traditional values of social justice and philanthropy had been seemingly going to the wayside, these new men gave a refreshing message, energizing the population to take action.(It must be noted that such a thing was not without precedent -one can find similar movements all across history, the followers of the Zoroastrian Prophet Mazdak during the reign of the Shahanshah Khavad in ancient Persia are one such example.) Naturally the aristocracy was terrified, but blocked off from their estates by Kantakouzenos’ army (Thessalonica was, strangely enough, always pro Regency despite its relatively high numbers of nobility and other large landowners) there was no way to enforce their demands and stamp out the increasingly aggravated peasantry.

What follows next is a slaughter, as angry mobs led by disgruntled monks and other charismatic leaders revolt against the established order. The aristocracy is brutally massacred within the walls of the city, and their property and wealth is redistributed amongst the lower classes. An interim government was established where in which a council- the majority of which were Zealot members or at the very least friendly to the Zealot establishment- ran the affairs of the city. This state of affairs continued until Regency forces broke the siege in 1343 and returned the city under imperial control. (In theory, in practice this really meant Thessalonica was more of an ally than a province)

Thessalonica, by the time the armies of the Regency breached the gates of the city, was no longer just another imperial city- it had become a de facto independent state. Where what once was an imperial city now lay a commune. And it was this curious state affairs, formed by the blockade of the outside world that allowed such a radical change. But whats even stranger is that due to the weakness of the imperial state, this was allowed to continue. Tired of war and rapidly running out of money, Apokaukos had no time for further adventures, and although he personally detested the Zealots, seeing them as a thorn in his side and a potential fifth column, he was pragmatic enough to leave them be for the time being. The Zealots had pledged their loyalty to his cause throughout the war due to a common hatred of the Old Regime and an interest in reform, and when the army proclaimed the reintegration no one really protested. But none of that involved removing members of the imperial council with his own men and restarting taxation. That would come later, and that would very likely start problems.

Apokaukos, in his seemingly incessant pragmatism, allowed the city to continue to run its internal affairs so long as a certain amount of taxation would be paid to the central government every year. As well, (and this was mostly to mollify his powerbase who viewed the action as a potential showing of weakness) his son John was appointed as mayor of the Thessalonian city council in hopes of working as a liaison between the Zealot controlled local government and the imperial state. And at the time, this deal worked out for everyone more or less. The Zealots got to run their own state in which the peasantry would obtain their rightful share and the old regime would be purged- a mini paradise in their eyes while the Imperial government obtained access to the major port, an additional source of revenue and her people for the navy. The circumstances of control would be a very subtle tug of war in the background where the Imperial and the local government battled for influence amongst the populace. This deal is also noticeable for by giving the Zealots their own autonomy, the state began to focus more of its energies on restoring Constantinople as a center of trade, which had been under steep decline.

This deal was not without its problems and opponents. Primarily of which was the Church who opposed the Zealots on the principle of being Barlaamists, and therefore heretical in their doctrine. The reigning Patriarch attempted to pressure the remainder of the Regency faction to move against the Zealots however they could, to limited results. The army simply wasn’t ready for more military actions, much less continue to aggravate potential causes of war, the Zealots were fairly popular in their own right and of course the state’s energies would be needed elsewhere to continue the planned reforms. Then there was the much of the middle class who viewed the Zealots as a threat to their small yet noticeable wealth. Being the ones who staffed the imperial bureaucracy and therefore dictated policy, they did what they could to reduce Zealot influence without resorting to any violent measures. Although it is certain many would be murdered behind the scenes for their beliefs, the most common way to weaken the Zealots was to simply erode their audiences and their popularity. Alleviating the concerns of the peasants with land and other opportunities to improve their station was seen as the moderate option that would dissuage many from choosing more radical paths. This was a mixed blessing- one the one hand Thessalonica shrunk due to all the people moving out and the Zealots were proportionately more powerful (it also didn’t help that the Thermidor effect was kicking in and many began to moderate their positions) but on the other, many peasants themselves exported the ideas of the Zealots to whatever small village they were relocated to, turning those villages into miniature communes as well. Thanks to the decentralization following the fourth crusade and the constant need to avert attention and resources to other matters, once these ideas spread and took root in the far corners of the empire, such matters were difficult to remove. The coming years would see Rome seeing these new ideas of anti aristocratic sentiment move in and spread, far away from their homelands.
Απολαύσατε το, παιδιά!

 

[Deleted member 67076]

All caught up. Great analysis on the reforms.

Enjoying! You're getting more polished as you go, too.

Thanks! This means quite a lot as I'm often unsure of my writing skills.

-----

The Genoese-Venetian War: Round 3, Part I

The period of peace and stability of the first decade of the Renovation was an excellent time for Eastern Rome. The economy grew, the population rose (after brutally being cut in the Black Death), state finances were better than they had been in decades and stability was the norm. As a whole, things looked great and the future was bright. But like all good things, it eventually came to an end. War would once more rear its ugly head and return to Rome. Only time would tell if the choices made under the new regime would be enough to save her.
​

But lets back this up real quick. Why would war return? A variety of factors, but long story short the current war Rome got dragged into was a reaction to the fluctuation of power in the region. You see, following the Black Death, nearly every country in Europe has suffered massive loss in people and thus, labor and tax base. Some of course, were more heavily hit than others. Venice, due to its dense nature and high population, suffered heavily. At the same time, her rival Genoa had lost nearly half of her population and resultingly, a huge source of income and less people to man the navy. This left Genoa in a very awkward position; where in which to keep the budget to a sustainable level Genoa would have to make a tough choice. Either they A) slash the military to a reasonable level (and therefore look weak, potentially inviting Venice or some other enemy to resume hostilities or B) do something drastic to keep the gold flowing. Naturally they chose option B, which translated into a show of force on the neighborhood. In less flattering terms, Genoa had turned to intensely raiding its neighbors, demanding tribute and cutting down on piracy in the region. While this sounds rather odd, it actually made (some) sense at the time. Raiding would provide much needed income quickly, and show that Genoa had not been weakened from the war. Additionally, cutting down on piracy (which in practice amounted to attacking Aragonese ships [1]) is a solid way of increasing your profit margin.

And this worked. Too well in fact. To the point where Venice was so scared it started an anti Genoese alliance with Aragon. (The latter joining in because those pirates ended up making a good amount of money for the state and with Castille suffering a major crises at the time Aargon felt more secure in its position) In the terms of the alliance, Aragon provided an extra ~30 galleys and any additional manpower Venice requested. This coalition of sorts was later expanded to get Pisa in the coalition the following year (1351), who was still furious about losing Corsica in 1295. With such a coalition of powers, Venice felt secure enough to resume its attempts to undermine the competition, which of course led to a resumption of hostilities. War was declared on 1350, with Venice and her allies planning to strike hard and fast on Genoese assets, hoping to strangle key sources of income and bring the Republic to its knees.

And initially, the overwhelming force did the job. In the first few months of the war, both Venice and Aragon moved their fleets to the Aegean. From there they launched concentrated raids, seizing and burning the colony of Galata near Constantinople. Following that, the other Crimean colonies of Genoa were put under siege [2] For the time being, it must have looked as if Genoa’s prospects were dire; they were drastically outnumbered (even with the reduced fleets in the aftermath of manpower shortage) and Genoa was stretched thin, with a host of trading ports, colonies and naval stations that the republic must defend. But that early luck ran out. Genoa regrouped her forces earlier and the war devolved into a chaotic series of hit and run attacks, raids, piracy and the occasional pitched sea battle.

Most of which, initially took place in the Aegean, the Ionian and Black Seas, which brings us to Eastern Rome. Despite intensive pressure from both republics, Rome kept a stance of armed neutrality for the first year. And initially, this was hard to dislodge. Unlike previous years, there was no separatists, no imperial claimants clawing for power and willing to revolt against the emperor and his inner circle, no great general to bribe and attack for them. Just a solid regime that was brutally in control with a loyal support base and a frustratingly large navy. (To the standards of the Genoa and Venice in this war, Genoa could barely field 100 galleys and here was Rome with a fully stacked ~40. Isn’t it wonderful to have a relatively large population?)

But back to the carnage. Despite all sides having a much smaller manpower base than before, they both fought harder and more fanatically than previously recorded, leading to much higher casualty rates. This was punctuated by a trend of increasingly more pitched battles with more and more ships and men thrown into the meatgrinder, culminating in the Battle of the Bosphorus in spring 1351. Over 100 ships were involved, the vast majority of them ending up at the bottom of the sea by the end of the battle. It was this moment that the Romans decided to gamble and join the war effort. The sheer amount of carnage and devastation that occurred right outside Constantinople’s doorstep convinced the inner circle of the empire that both sides would be exhausted and this was a golden opportunity to expand. A month after the battle’s conclusion, an emissary reached doge’s palace in Genoa. Rome would lend her men and ships to Genoa’s cause.

[1] Aragon was a major source of pirates and occasionally privateers in the Mediterranean. I say occasionally as when caught raiding Christians states Aragon denied all involvement to my knowledge, throwing those sailors under the bus to save face. You know, despite sanctioning the sailors and funding them. Anyway the pirates were officially sanctioned as a countermeasure to Muslim pirates in the region, but these men didn’t discriminate on religious grounds. Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, Tengri- it didn’t matter. You’re cargo is as a good as anyone else’s.

[2] Happened OTL. This is not an attempt to subtly improve the Byzantines’ prospects although one can see how they’d benefit from this. In any case, Galatta is simply too valuable to leave alone, as with one quick strike, the best trading port in the Aegean has just been neutralized.

 

[Deleted member 67076]

Wow, nearly 10,000 views and over 100 posts already. All of my thanks to the readers for getting this far.

-------

The Genoese-Venetian War: Round 3, Part II​

When we last left off in the narrative we see Rome finally deciding to willingly enter yet another brutal and potentially destructive conflict. One that was had been taking a massive toll on both sides, spiraling into an ever more chaotic and ferocious warzone where it seemed like every battle was trying to up the ante on the carnage. You’d think that after a mere decade of reform it’d be unwise to return to like sticking one’s hand into a hornet’s nest. Even worse when you consider the historical track record: pretty much every time Rome decided to intervene in the affairs of the warring states, they ended up losing in some way or another. So why here? Why not just stay on the sidelines and watch both weaken themselves? Here it was somewhat different- Rome had quite a lot to gain for little work, relatively speaking. The fighting would be in their backyard (or so they thought), the Merchant republics (and the Beylik of Aydin) would do most of the work, and the tantalizing prizes of Athens, Naxos, and other former possessions would be open for reconquest without many complaining about aggression. It was a relatively reasonable proposition in terms of economic calculus at the time. And that economic calculus also explains the rationale for who’s side to take in this conflict. In joining the war effort alongside Genoa, Eastern Rome had more to gain: Revenge for the Fourth Crusade, forcing a major rival to start paying commerce taxes once more, regaining prestige, weakening an enemy and of course, seizing territory. Of which, that last one was likely the greatest material incentive to support Genoa. In antagonizing Genoa, Romania might regain the Crimea and once more cement Constantinople as the major trading center in the Black and Aegean seas (as Galata would most certainly be destroyed). But in siding with Genoa, Romanian opens herself up to taking all the Venetian territories dotted around her lands; the Venetian islands in the Ionian sea, the Duchy of Athens, the Duchy of the Islands (better known as Naxos), Euboea and of course the grand prize of Crete. (They of course weren’t thinking that Genoa might want some of that too but whatever). Venice was just too tempting to resist, and her allies far, far away.

With these questions answered, let us return to the narrative and continue onward. Upon the formal agreement to join forces with the Genoese “For retribution at the injustices, the expulsion, and final extermination of the Venetian Republic”, public sentiment in Genoa rose, as with it the desire to continue the war. Neither of the Italian Republics were blind to the developments going on in Eastern Rome, with its de-urbanization, naval expansion and fraternization with the Turkish Beyliks being treated as curious developments that while should not be taken a blind eye towards, were not enough of a threat to merit intervention- especially not when tensions had been rapidly plummeting with Venice and the other Italian states. Everyone in Genoa knew war would once more return since Venice began to occupy the critical niche Genoa had set for itself as the broker between the Steppe Khans of the Silk Road and Western Europe. Wasting resources to put the Byzantines back in line, critically when they’re united under stronger leadership than hadn’t been seen since the days of Michael VII would be a waste of money at best, and a grievous folly at worst. But that’s irrelevant now. What is, is that Genoa had seen a positive development of the East Roman state and gladly accepted its aid in a time of crisis.

And now back to the story. In the next month or so the two powers would see talks of coordination and mobilization of military assets in East Rome. These talks would prove a very fruitful endeavor, with a brilliant plan devised that would critically shift the balance in this war. Taking advantage of Rome’s outward neutrality and policy of naval rearmament to avoid suspicion, Genoa managed to smuggle many of its engineers, shipwrights and other specialists (disguised as Turkish merchants of all things) to build a Genoese fleet in Constantinople via the latter’s arsenal over the winter. At the same time, Rome would use a combination of bribery and diplomatic leverage to shift the piracy of Aydinids and their allies away from the Genoese republic, freeing additional ships to be used in the fight against Venice. In the Queen of Cities, the resources of the empire were put at work to expand the shipyards and docks to build the desired fleet. The urban poor would be put to work in building the fleet and Genoese loans would pay for the raw materials and upkeep needed. Not to say that our empire got a blank check, but Genoese banks were very generous in how they split the bill. Despite initial hopes, progress was slower than expected thanks to a combination of inexperience and lack of institutions that were present in the Merchant Republics to facilitate the building and outfitting of ships. In spite of that however, the winter was fruitful and 26 ships were built, outfitted and manned to Genoese specifications.

On the spring of 1352, the new offensive was launched. Not from the port of Constantinople, but from a field army in Northern Thessaly. Roman forces were too cut off and occupy the Duchy of Athens, preventing the arrival of reinforcements to Venetian controlled Euboea. The ‘field army’, comprising the bulk of the professional Roman forces, swept through the relatively impoverished region straight for the capital. Athenian forces, the descendents of the Catalan company that initially conquered the territory in the early 1300s put up decent amounts of resistance when the knights could, despite the deck being thoroughly stacked against them. Athenian forces were stretched thin following the war’s beginning (where under orders from Barcelona, the military had to support Venice as much as they could, which amounted to having a large contingent of troops stationed on the island and away from their manors) and the military wasn’t under the best conditions due to an increasingly worsening economy, that began to crack under the strain of no longer receiving Roman imports [1]. This was then followed up by Roman soldiers enticing revolts by the local Greek peasantry using the incentives of restoring Orthodoxy and lowering taxes. And, contrary to what one might expect at this point, nobles were not massacred (Ok most of the time). Instead ransoming being for a profit was the standard, for both money and for limiting the annoyance of Aragon, who still had limited engagement.

One can probably see where this is going. In just a few months, Athens is in dire shape; the military’s already overstretched with commitments overseas, the economy is rapidly contracting forcing higher extractions on the peasantry, the invading army is matching your forces better than expected, and the amount of fires needing to be put out in the form of revolts is growing more and more. Eventually this leads to troops deserting and most of the land being in enemy hands by May, and the capital being sieged in July. Oh, and your initial goal of defending the Venetian island failed. Horribly. Its no surprise that when the Romans reach the walls of the city, Duke Frederick [2] surrenders without much of a fight under the offer of clemency from Romania.

Oh, and speaking of Euboea, at the same time Romania’s troops marched down to reclaim their territory on the mainland, from Constantinople emerged a combined Roman-Genoese fleet launching simultaneous attack on the island. Overwhelming force was once again the rule, despite valiant resistance. The Island capitulated swiftly, and with it the major Venetian forts in the Aegean. It gets worse the Venetians, as word reaches the city that Naxos, their ‘ally’ has fallen. Its not from the usual suspects however; instead it was, of all things, the Beylik of Aydin, who made a calculated risk attacking a Venetian territory correctly guessing that enemy forces would be more focused on other matters than on a minor, if strategically located player in the Aegean.

The next few months would be a slow, steady advance for the Roman-Genoese axis. The fleet, split into several squadrons began to patrol and push out the Venetians from the Aegean bit by bit. The chaotic battles and rapid raids that characterized the war remained, but ever so slightly Venice began to withdraw more and more; raids became scarcer and smaller in volume and full on assaults with the attempt of conquest were by end the of year nonexistent. By early 1343, Venice had lost any semblance of control in the Aegean, with even its holdings in the Ionian isles being threatened. With such major obstacles out of the way, the two powers grew confident. They had the effectively succeeded at a major war goal: Pushing the enemy out of the vital Black Sea trade routes and eliminating resistance along the way. Drunk on victory, they began to plan bolder and bolder offensives- a raid on Corfu, on Dalmatia, on Syracuse. But those wouldn’t do. What was needed was a final knockout blow to cripple the Venetians in their entirety before striking the killing blow. And quickly the two powers found their target: The crown jewel in Venice’s empire, Crete.

[1] See post 73
[2] Same guy as OTL.

 

[Deleted member 67076]

This took way, way longer than expected.

-----

The Third Genoese-Venetian War: Part III​

For the time being it looked as if victory was in sight for the Anti Venetian coalition. The battlefield between the powers was increasingly swinging from the Aegean to the Adriatic and the stresses of war had been taking its toll on their enemies. Venetian ships were spotted less and less, and assaults had become mere raids. Pisa’s navy had been utterly smashed by Genoa as the easing of the Aegean front allowed for more forces to be diverted west. And Aragon still seemed to be mostly disinterested in the whole affair, mainly just loaning ships and arms to its allies in the conflict. It must have seen as if Venice and her allies were trying to delay the inevitable loss in order to exhaust the two, perhaps in hopes of obtaining a more favorable peace? Whatever the case, the writing was on the wall and Rome and Genoa were eager to finish the fight. Eager, and blinded by victory.

What Genoa and Romania hadn’t noticed was that Venice was regrouping and conducting diplomatic negotiations of their own. The war had taken an immense strain and they were well aware the Aegean was lost- most of the raids were designed to slow the inevitable, not reverse them. Instead what had been occurring throughout this time was for the Venetian state was to try to use whatever diplomatic leverage it had to try to tip the scales in the war and back out as much as it can. Emissaries were sent out to to attempt to convince Aragon to put in its full naval strength in this matter. Until this point (approximately spring-summer 1343) the crown of Aragon had been engaged in a limited manner, mostly throwing privateers, a couple squadrons of ships and coin against Genoa, despite the initial enthusiasm espoused by the state. But the merchant republic managed to convince them that this was more dire than they had realized. Athens had fallen, Pisa had been rendered a moot point after a decisive defeat, and Venice had been pushed back to the Aegean with Genoa in striking zone of Sardinia, potentially destroying any thoughts of expanding into the island of Sicily. Aragon was no longer a distant combatant with much to gain and nothing to lose, instead it had the potential to lose some serious prestige and strategic territories. With such pressing matters in mind, the crown scrambled its assets and began to throw her full weight into the war.

Additionally, diplomats were sent out to other potential states that could be sent out to attack either Genoa or Romania. Prospects for this were, less fortunate however. Milan was immediately out of the picture, their strict neutrality in the matters between Italian states was something both parties agreed must remain, lest the Milanese decide to destroy the balance of power in Italy to the detriment of both. The Papal state was calling for an end to the war so that’s not an option. Hungary? Exhausted from its recent wars in keeping the nobility in line and cementing royal power. Naples? Too busy invading Sicily. Bulgaria? Allied to the imperials. Etc, etc. However, there was one major diplomatic success: Serbia. The northeastern neighbor of the imperials had always had designs on its southern neighbor, driven by the latter’s history of wealth and prestige. The recent successes under the great king Stefan V Dusan have both strengthened, enlarged and emboldened the kingdom- but it is not enough: the kingdom is eager for more glories. Stefan, always the astute opportunist, quickly recognized the potential opening and agreed to intervene. The imperials have been bloodied and weakened over the years, and her forces are small. With the right timed attack, there could be massive gains to be made. And so Serbia began to mobilize.

We then resume the narrative with Genoa and Eastern Rome having begun preparations for their boldest strike yet: seizing Crete. The two forces begin to amass the largest single fleet of the war. Easing the pressure from both the Aegean front and the Western one to recruit the largest possible amount of ships available, the swollen armada launched from Romania intent on seizing its prey. Crete, the crown jewel of Venice was to be the greatest victory in the war- a decisive blow that would force the enemy to come to its knees, before the hammer would land on the lagoon-something like that. Back in the real world, Crete would be a decisive victory- a decisively pyrrhic victory.

Why? Overconfidence, bad luck, successful baiting by enemy forces, good command by the Aragonese admiral- take your pick. Point is, that ‘decisive’ attack on Crete ends up with much (perhaps a good 60% or so) of the Roman-Genoese fleet being destroyed, captured or damaged beyond repair. Crete is indeed liberated- and Venice and her allies are unable to recapture from the Cretans- but the alliance is forced into a quick retreat to lick their wounds. It gets better: following this is a well equipped Serbian army advancing southwards into Macedonia without much opposition, pushing (although not as easily as anticipated) through the undermanned and somewhat neglected army of Rome. In a wonderful few weeks, the anti-Genoese coalition ges from teetering on the edge of defeat, to renewing the offensive.

And perhaps in an equally cruel twist of fate, that ‘renewed offensive’ loses steam pretty quickly. Constantinople and Thessalonica are really close by, and their arsenals are up and ready. The wounds are licked, the forces regrouped and the battle lines restabilized. Even Serbia’s advance slows down once it comes to face with armed militia groups and akritoi border guards picking at supply lines and waging guerilla warfare from the mountains. This is then followed up with reserve units from Thrace coming to provide backup and actually managing to score a few victories against the Serbs. (The irony of Dusan being in the same situation Charles I of Hungary during his invasion of Serbia was not lost to him)

And so, the stalemate returns. Or so one would think. You see, while the lines do seem rather static for a couple months afterward, there’s this one event happens to shatter that fragile balance: In Alfonso’s Castile, King Alfonso XI has died, leaving no legitimate issue, but a host of bastards. It is the final straw in an increasingly unstable period in the kingdom. For Castile, this is a time of terror and woe- but for Aragon, this is opportunity. It is a matter far, far more pressing and just too good to ignore than crippling Genoa to make sure Aragon’s trade volume increases and its pirate’s aren’t harassed. While Aragon never officially removes itself from the conflict, the volume of men, arms and ships coming to aid the war front trickles to a fraction of its volume after the capture of Crete.

Aragon’s unofficial withdrawal seals Venice’s fate. In the absence of that much needed, er, everything, the republic simply isn’t able to keep up. By early 1356 the Venetian lagoon itself in a blockade intent and its navy has been shattered. Even additional aid from Serbia isn’t enough to divert the pressure as the imperials had managed to mount a successful resistance, driving the Serbs more than once back onto their territory. This was not helped by Serbia being smart enough to quit while it was ahead in exchange for status quo antebellum.

Anyways, everyone knows Venice had lost by this point. While there were a few warhawks who would push for a final last stand, cooler heads (and food riots) prevailed. Venice agreed to surrender in exchange for the city itself to be unharmed. Surprisingly, the enemy combatants agreed to this matter, although this was more of a case of ‘invading and subduing the city state would be extremely expensive and bloody and both combatants were pretty exhausted at this point’ rather than a love of their common man and a desire to avoid wartime atrocities. That does not mean, in any way Venice got off lightly.

Negotiated by Petrarch and the Milanese government (in the hopes that a ‘neutral’ third party might make negotiations smoother), the terms of the treaty would be a magnitude harsher than what they were in previous trade conflicts.

In summation, the treaty’s terms would be as followed:

-Venice would be barred from trading the Black Sea in its totality (this did not bar Venetians from trading, mind. Only the state owned Venetian trading company.)
-Venice would have to resume paying commercial dues to Romania they had ‘neglected’ to pay since the days of the Komnenoi.
-The Duchy of Candia (Crete) would receive its independence from the Venetian state. Venetian colonists would be expelled from the island and resettled whereon Genoa and Romania would see fit.
-Euboea was to be recognized as sovereign territory of the republic of Genoa.
-Limits would be imposed on the amount of active wartime vessels Venice would have.
-Romania would be confirmed in her annexation the territories of the duchy of Athens and the Ionian isles. The same with Genoa and Corfu.
-Naxos would be confirmed as territory of the beylik of Aydin.
-Reparations would be imposed to both states, including the transfer of objects looted from Constantinople from the Fourth Crusade.

And there you have it. The conclusion to a very brutal, but formative war in the newest phase of the Roman Empire.

 

[Deleted member 67076]

Here's the map:

 

[Deleted member 67076]

Castile After Rio Salado
​

In the previous installment, you read about the kingdom of Aragon pretty much abandoning their efforts against the Genoese to invade Castile. While this may sound like leaving the Venetians to their own fate and rather cold, to be fair to the Aragonese its pretty hard to understate this golden opportunity. You see, when Alfonso XI of neighboring Castile had died, he was leaving a kingdom with no clear successor, but with host of bastards (10 of them in total) vying for control. Each of them were scrambling to find a patron, power base or whatever they can use to outmaneuver their brothers to the throne. A succession war was clearly in the works. The latest in the downward spiral.

But how does that benefit Aragon you might ask? Couple of ways. The obvious ways are that it weakens Castile, giving Aragon proportionally more influence on the peninsula and of course weakening a potential rival. Another is the potential to go and seize territory during the chaos. The border disputes of Aragon and Castile were… lively, to put it one way and here is a good time to press your claims and get away with it. And yet another reason to invade is to prop up a friendly king. Preferably one that’s pliable… Anyways, point is Aragon had a lot to gain. Far more than wasting ships and men on an annoying stalemate in the Adriatic.

But lets give some backstory first: Why is Castile going so badly?

Well, back in 1341, the Castilians were making a large, costly assault on the Muslim lands. The intent wasn’t conquest per se, but to seize the strategic Strait of Gibraltar, which had, along with other territories such as Algeciras, been part of the Marinid Sultanate and was their primary staging ground for launching invasions on the European continent and beat back a massive Marinid invasion at the time. Alfonso XI realized the strategic value (or wanted a cheap shot at glory, your pick) and realized he needed to obtain these lands. With his allies the Portuguese on one side and volunteers (and loans) from the Papal states on another, Alfonso gathered a massive host by the standards of the day and marched south to destroy the Marinid threat. One army under his direct control would destroy the Muslim forces on land, while his and his allies’ armadas would match the Marinids at sea.

He failed. Disastrously. The initial battle between the was lost decisively thanks to the Marinid Sultan playing a bit more cautiously and keeping his fleet in Algeciras rather than send them back and disengage (the Marinids were kinda short on cash at the time), meaning the Castilian fleet isn’t able to match their enemies, and, thus gets systematically destroyed upon meeting a larger enemy. It gets worse: The army sent to fight the Nasrids gets crushed as the Marinid Sultan, Abu Al-Hasan, feeling more secure with the Castilian fleet eliminated, ferried more troops from the Maghreb to back up the Nasrid forces. Troops are additionally raised by the Moroccans bribing various Rif tribes with promises of plunder and land. With the channel clear, the army gets safely ferried and bolsters the mainland forces.

And here’s where it gets worse: As you expected, Alfonso’s army was smashed. Brutally. But what you might not have guessed is that Alfonso himself got captured and transferred in custody to Fes as a prisoner of the Sultan. Here the Marinids have gained the upper hand. (Oh by the way, that relief fleet the Portuguese sent out also suffered pretty badly facing the Corsairs and eventually was forced to withdraw). Meanwhile the combined Marinid-Nasrid army is marching pretty much unopposed in Andalusia and Algarve, looting whatever and whoever they can down south. The Iberians scramble to respond and do manage to raise another army and fleet (the latter paid almost entirely by Papal loans). Eventually the Marinids were stopped outside Badajoz but at that point basically everything south of Seville has been sacked.

So the Sultan agrees for peace. Alfonso returns to his throne, for a heavy price. Already having gotten the money he needed, the Sultan wasn’t interested in reparations- he wants land. And he gets it. Most of the province of Seville is lost and many a border town near Granada (pretty much everything up to Jaen more or less) is ceded to either him or the Nasrid Emirate. Portugal on the other hand gets off easy- just a few reparations and most of the shipyards in the Algarve set on fire.

But of course it doesn’t end there. Alfonso returns to find his kingdom in debt to the Pope and his allies. So he has to raise taxes, which lessens his popularity back home. And then the plague comes next. And then his son and heir Peter dies. And a couple of peasant revolts that have to be put down. Eventually, he dies “suddenly and mysteriously” in 1355, leaving Castile with no king and 10 pretenders, which is where Aragon at that point begins to look giddy.

 

[Deleted member 67076]

Re: Bulgaria, its an option and we'll see how it goes.

Anyways, going to try something new. Timeline's going to flash forward to the mid 1370s after this next set of posts as that's when the initial phase of recovery will have paid off and John V will be actually wielding power. Therefore, since it'll be around 30-40 years after the POD I feel like I should talk about what's been going on around the rest of the world and how the butterflies have been kicking in. Most of the time these should be short, one page or so summaries that don't go into much detail if that's alright. I want to give a sense of whats been going on but at the same time the last thing I need is to be bogged down in one corner of the world trying to iron out specific details when broad strokes will do the same. This is Eastern Rome's story, not anyone else's.

-----

The World Around Rome​

While Romania fell into a period of rest and reorganization following its war with Venice, not all had that luxury of peace and quiet. All around, the nations of the world were undergoing a state of flux; with some waxing and others waning. It is a time of violent clashes and tense struggles, as the cusp of a new age dawns. Let us take a moment to bring you up to speed on how things have changed in the brief, fleeting moment the empire is at peace.

Southeast Europe [1]​

If there is a word to describe the situation of the Southwest Europe during the latter half of the 1350s and the 60s, it was detente. The previous clashes that had so characterized centuries of policy between the 3 majors states (Serbia, Bulgaria and Romania) of the region had given way to a mutually agreed sentiment of peace. All 3 sides, despite their intense rivalries with each other had felt that it was more beneficial to keep the peace and turn their energies to other matters.

Now you know that the elites in Romania were very wary of spending valued blood and treasure on wars for some uncertain prize of land and fortresses. But that leaves Serbia and Bulgaria? Why did they remain at peace with their each other, and Romania? The simple answer is that there were more pressing matters to attend to, either at home or abroad that made the prospect of warring unwise. For Serbia, there is the looming threat of Hungary, growing stronger each year by the leadership of their young king Louis. Coming on the scene at the head of a shattering realm, Louis returned the level of centralization that his father’s reforms had started, working hard to cement royal authority along with rebuilding the depleted army. By the 1360s, his work had been mostly completed, and Serbia was increasingly worrying over another round of invasion, this time far larger and more brutal than the previous. Now, it was time to placate her neighbors and ensure the Serbian military was at a state of constant readiness in the event of a sudden invasion.

But what about Bulgaria? During the latter half of the reign of Bulgaria, the tsardom came to deal with the problems of an increasingly independent minded Bolyar class that had started to resent royal authority and were making trouble for Ivan Alexander. This wasn’t helped by the policy of creating what Romania would call ‘despotates’, in which a viceroy under the Tsar’s permission would exercise considerable amount of authority. The amount varied depending on person of course, but it had a noticeably corrosive effect on the power of the central government.

Obviously, such a thing had to be dealt with, but such a thing would inevitably be costly and expend much political will and likely lead to revolts. Common sense dictates that in order to go about your costly centralization efforts you need a conductive environment and, of course, the easiest way to do so would be to eliminate the risk of having those who would try to stir the pot. Alliances had been made with Serbia and Romania in the 1330s-40s, but they were confirmed later in order to buy Bulgaria enough time to hopefully reform. And in this there was success. Ivan Alexander, as the last main accomplishment of his long reign had brought back the tsar’s power. Wasn’t easy, wasn’t fast, but ultimately it was successful.

Now what of the other states in the [Balkans] you ask? Epirus and Achaea? The former is in the process of having its economic integrity destroyed as the Romans continue to dump cheap manufactured goods and grain from the Black Sea and Bulgaria into the region. This doesn’t sound like much as most of the population would be subsistence farmers, but it does hurt the state’s economy and makes it more dependent on her neighbors and imports.

As for Achaea, it continues to be a source of quasi-exile for Neapolitan nobles.

[1] Without the Ottomans, what we know as the Balkans wouldn’t be called that. Instead lets use the nice, neutral name of Southeast Europe, that can conveniently be stretched to include anything south and east of Germany.

 

[Deleted member 67076]

Any idea when the next part will be up?

Right now.

-----

The World around Romania: Anatolia​

Anatolia: the ancient heartland of the Roman Empire. Once the powerbase of the ancient state, it has been overrun by various principalities, each one claiming mandate over the others after the implosion of the Seljuq Sultanate. For with the receding of the Mongols comes the receding of whatever shred of authority the Seljuq Sultan had left.

For those wise enough, cunning enough and bold enough, this is the golden opportunity, a boundless frontier ripe for the taking. Who shall take the land of the Rumi? No one knows. There's a host of contenders that could do so. Start taking bets kids.

On paper, the house of Osman is in the strongest position to do so. It is by far the largest of the Rum’s successors, stretching from Ankara to Bursa. Its territory consists of the wealthiest zone of the Roman Empire in Asia. The administration is rapidly shifting from a confederation of tribes united by a strong leader and promises of plunder into a proper state with a modern bureaucracy. The Ottoman army is large, well equipped and fearsome. Its done well for itself in the short decades since its foundation. But it is far from an ideal situation. But... the reality on the ground is far from perfect. The transition of the Ottomans has severely alienated the beylik from any potential allies and the lack of Christians to plunder have cut off many would be Ghazi recruits. The other beyliks fear their larger neighbor, seeing the Ottoman appetite for territory as insatiable. The attack on the ailing Karesids has done nothing to assuage that fear. And with that fear comes conspiracy, and with conspiracy, coalitions.

Now while the Ottomans have driven themselves into diplomatic isolation, the Germiyanids have done just the opposite. Instead, they've focused almost entirely on diplomacy. Keeping good relations (as much as possible given everyone wants all of Anatolia for themselves) with all their immediate neighbors, the House of Germiyan has established itself as a powerful trade nexus in Anatolia and a bastion of stability. Said stability has done wonders for the state.

But lets give some background. This stability begins with the existing ties of marriage and alliance with Aydin and Saruhan. Which sets a precedent for peaceful relations amongst most of their neighbors. But the alliance with the two maritime emirates plays to their advantage:the beylik uses its stability to attract merchants to its roads, shuffling the bulk on inland trade into Germiyan territory. This is combined with policies of tolerance and integration, causing refugees (mostly Christian Greeks) to pour into Germiyan territory for safety and a fresh start, where the emir is quick to use them to his advantage. Anyone with ties to Rum has is put to work at the royal court. Now in the years that follow, this has led a mirror image (of sorts) of Romania start to form.

The burgeoning bureaucracy is fully staffed, gifting the state with far more administrative prowess than all its rivals. Combined with the other policies that state has enacted, a rising power is in the making. Its emphasis on diplomacy grant stability and allies. With that stability comes trade. Trade grants wealth. And with that wealth, prosperity. The tools needed to build an empire. But that wouldn't be an empire without a military. To that end, gifts of treasury and womenfolk tie the neighboring tribes and their fearsome cavalry into the system. While consolidation of militias and recruitment drives (with regular payments of coin and land) allow for a small yet well equipped standing army to form. A perverse corruption of the theme system. Eastern Rome would cringe.

But they would probably find Germiyan somewhat good news. You see, as the decades pass, the emirs begin to adopt more of their subjects mannerisms, their language and their culture, in turn losing much of their steppe and Turkic ways. Their territory, located just south of the Ottomans, right in the center of the old Komnenian heartland, is primarily Greek both in language, ethnicity (best word I could find) and religion. Initially the emirs had been conquerors, imposing Islam and the Turkic ways. But by the start of the 1370s, the conquerors are becoming the conquered.

Aydin is next on on the list. When we last the beylik, it had started to expand into the waves, establishing control over the duchy of the Isles, commonly known as the duchy of Naxos. The state was, and still remains a valued Roman ally (or lapdog, depending on who you ask). Aydin’s next few years can be summed up as aggressive expansion in everything. In the field of territory, Aydin has pushed its frontiers, south into Mentese and into (after an admittedly pyrrhic victory) Rhodes. In trade, things has similarly been ramped up. A series of trade quarters have been established in Muslim territories all around the Eastern Mediterranean. The volume of trade entering Smyrna has at least doubled as Smyrna becomes a the major trade nexus of goods entering Anatolian (This is in conjunction with their allies, the Germiyanids). In the military, the navy has become an armada fielded by ghazis and opportunists eager for plunder and payment. And finally, in piracy the Aydins have started expanding their operations outside the Aegean to all around the Mediterranean, much to the fury of, well everyone that’s not Romania (who just laughs at their anguish).

Karaman, our final contender in the Game for the Seljuq Throne, is by far the most... orthodox of the beyliks. Its the one beylik that has least diverged from its steppe roots, relying the most on the prestige of the emir and constant plunder in order to enforce the state’s will. Despite the quixotic nature of such a state, the success is undeniable. Karaman rules the bulk of the Central Anatolian plateau with an iron fist, binding the nomads to the emir’s authority and diverting their energies in the pursuit of replacing the Seljuq sultans as the next major dynasty. For now Karaman is on the upswing, conquering and raiding against all. However its lack of reform, both militarily and administratively is going to deeply hurt it in the future.

Moving on, we have Candar and Trebizond, the Pontic realms. Not much is happening within Candar, aside from increasing ties with Saruhan in an attempt to ward off against the Ottomans. But in Trebizond, its apogee is beginning under Alexios III. Balancing the trading prowess of Genoa with Romania (and later on) Adyin, Trebizond managed to wrest control of its commercial affairs. Alexios III had further increased the power of the state by crushing rebellious nobles and centralizing the state under his absolute power (something Eastern Rome was eager to help their client ruler with).

And that concludes the tour of Anatolia. There isn’t much to say about the other principalities that inhabited the plateau. They are, to be honest not important enough to be mentioned and to focus on them would be little more than filler. You just need to know the Mamluks have conquered Armenia minor, establishing a frontier at the Taurus Mountains and have begun to vassalize the easternmost beyliks.

 

[Deleted member 67076]

Really great update. It's about how I'd imagine Asia Minor in a scenario like this. One wonders what direction some of the more tolerant and Greek states will go...

I really like what you've done with Aydin, it's good to see that good relationship continue..

The support is appreciated. The Aydinids are fun to write about.

Anyways, here's something short and tantalizing while my midterms are underway.

-------


When we last left the empire, it was at 1356, at the signing of a peace treaty between two conflicting power blocs: A Genoese-Roman Alliance, and a coalition of Venetian led forces. Venice had, to put it bluntly, brutally lost the war and the peace showed. The treaty’s terms were harsh, involving massive losses of territory and a loss of entire markets- the ultimate punishment for a state whose economy was based on trade. But to the winners it was a just revenge (if such a thing is possible) against the centuries of transgressions the enemies had inflicted on them - you decide if that’s the case.

Anyways, this victory makes a vital turning point in imperial fortunes, literally and figuratively. For you see, the Empire has just gained territory for the first time since 1337, but more importantly with a major rival crippled, the rare breathing room for development that the state so desperately needed was finally there. We of course mustn’t ignore what’s been going on in Serbia and Bulgaria, but its really this-the crippling of Venice- that signals things are improving.

For with the withdrawal of Venice, a void is left. Something Romania will be very eager to replace. There's just so much to gain, All that extra trade, and customs revenue to be made. And as you might expect, that’s what happened. (Genoa also did the same, but the growth was rather slower due to having to rebuild their dilapidated navy and treasury before expanding trade. Compare this to Romania, who didn’t bear the brunt of much of the fighting in the same way the Merchant Republic did)

So what follows is a long economic expansion in Romania stemming from the Romans (partially) taking over Venice’s role as the major trading power in the Aegean and as the secondary trading power in the Black Sea. No longer worrying about the wrath of the Italians, Roman merchants and businessmen began to expand into previously unseen areas. With this expansion of course comes large amounts of wealth, filling the coffers to a level unseen since arguably Michael VIII. The income from trade is then put to use expanding the navy and the dockyards, which expands trade, which in turn brings in more wealth. Additionally, the artisanal sector sees a renaissance; not only are domestic markets able to buy, but the expansion of trade means that the demand for products such as Roman silk or wine begin to rise.

The old focus on areas where the Italians weren’t very active in isn’t forgotten by the empire however, in fact operations into places where competition is less is expanded, particularly in the Maghreb. As the Marinids conquer more and more of the African coast, the more markets the Roman state gets to sell its wares. (In fact, the Roman economy actually begins to start linking itself with the Trans-Saharan economy where the demand for Roman silk is insane, but that’s another story)

From the coattails of this comes a growth in all sectors of the economy, as sailors spend their hard earned income on their homes. At the same time, the state continues its distribution of patronage with infrastructure such as roads, hospitals, baths, etc. But perhaps most importantly are the establishment of financial institutions designed to aid an increasingly mercantile based state: Banks, Counting houses, that sort of thing. Which in turn are taken advantage by well to do yeoman farmers who began to improve their plots, or savvy businessmen looking to grow their profits.

This newfound wealth isn’t distributed equally. Cities are by far the beneficiaries of the next the years of expansion, much to the dissatisfaction of the country folk. It must be noted that yes, their quality of life and per capita income has risen over the years, but that is primarily due to less taxes being levied rather than government investment in their regions. Like with the army, the frontiers have been somewhat neglected. Outside of providing defensive fortifications and the necessary infrastructure to move and supply armies quickly and effectively, the state doesn’t really care about anything else in the frontier. In fact there’s a large amount of support in the government to purposely neglecting the frontiers economic development; it’ll make the empire appear less of a target and reduce raids, enemy forces will have a harder time scrounging off the land, the investment is put to better use in the south where the chance of attacks are much smaller, and so on. Understandibly the Zealot philosophy, with its emphasis on equality and prosperity for all had started to entrench itself amongst the rural population, eager for a slice of success. But another reason for the entrenchment of the Zealots amongst the rural poor in Macedonia that geographically, this new wealth tended to be clustered in the south, towards the cities and the coastal regions.

It must be stated that due to the mechanism of external trade, what with the the state’s monopoly and all, that whoever gets paid and benefits from this wealth was tied into a system of patronage within the government. This is not something new- patronage had been a noted part of Byzantine governance since the days of Alexios I, but with the rise of commercial activity and the state trading company becoming one of the principal sources of income for the empire, it was increasingly important to play into the cronyism and the cliques of the system.