WI Despotate of Epirus did not appear in 1205?

GeoffreyVillehardouin

For example, Michael I Komnenos Doukas was killed in 1201, when he rebelled against the Emperor. Or later, when he led Turkish raids into Byzantine territory.

So, Despotate of Epirus was not created by Michael.
This part belonged to Venice, and I think they managed lands more or less, and at the end asked a crusader to be a ruler in the inner parts of Epirus.
In June 1209 Geoffrey I of Villehardouin became the vassal of the Republic of Venice - and it seems that in TTL he got Epirus as well.
In OTL, Geoffrey captured Corinth and Nauplia in 1210, Argos in 1212.
It seems he finished with Corinth and Nauplia first, then went to Epirus, settled it and returned to Argos, probably, a year or two later.

So it was my first thought, when I planned to save the life of Peter II of Courtenay in the first place.

When I started to investigate the period, I found that Michael I Komnenos Doukas in 1209 had ransomed Alexious III - and from Epirus Alexious went to Kaykhusraw I, the sultan of Rum. Kaykhusraw I demanded from Theodore Laskaris to relinquish his domains to the legitimate emperor, and when Theodore refused, Kaykhusraw I attacked him.
So in TTL, Alexious died in Montferrat.

But, I think, Kaykhusraw I attacked Theodore anyway, maybe even in the same 1211 year (or a bit later).
In OTL, the main battle was lost by Theodore, but Kaykhusraw I was killed in the battle. As I think that the death of Kaykhusraw I was rather random, in TTL he should live longer - and, probably, he captured Meander Valley.

In the next year, as in OTL (in TTL it may be the same 1212 or a bit later), Henry of Flanders attacked Theodore Laskaris.
In OTL, Michael I Komnenos Doukas attacked the Latin Empire immediately. In TTL, where Epirus does not exist, Henry had more resources.

So it seems, Theodore Laskaris became the vassal of Henry - and united both churches under the Pope.

What are your thoughts?
Is it possible or did I miss anything? 🙂
What will be next?
 

GeoffreyVillehardouin

After some discussions, I have decided that another battle on Maeander is very big POD, and in such timeline Epirus just is not interesting.
So, Kaykhusraw I killed in 1211.
As in OTL, Theodore concluded a peace treaty with Kaykhushraw's son and successor, Kaykaus I.

In 1211 Henry attacked Theodore - but, I think, the war finished about 1214 with the same result, as in OTL - Latin Empire got some territories.
In 1216 Henry died - as in OTL.

New emperor was elected, as in OTL, he was Peter II of Courtenay.
But in TTL he was not captured by Epirus and died in the prison in 1219 - he ruled Empire until his death, about 1221 (he was rather old, when he was elected).
During his rule, Peter made border with Bulgaria stronger - fortresses were build, new people were welcomed with much privileges in taxation.
Also, Peter helped Demetrios of Montferrat, King of Thessalonica, kept his throne (Demetrios was young, in OTL Epirus captured Thessalonica).

Peter II had the very young son (as in OTL, he was born in 1217) and in TTL - a young daughter, born in 1219.
Older son of Peter was invited as the regent - Robert of Courtenay.
Theodore Laskaris died in 1221, and Robert supported his brothers against John III Vatatzes (as he did in OTL).
Robert and crusaders are heavily defeated by John III. John returned all territories in Asia Minor and some islands. (In OTL Epirus captured much of territories of Latin Empire as well, but in TTL all territories are still owned by the Empire).
Peace was bad, Robert became very unpopular - and died in 1228.
 

GeoffreyVillehardouin

Next regent was John of Brienne (He was named "Hector", "Roland" - and proabably "Lancelot", but the novels are not written yet).
Ivan Asen II of Bulgaria was offended - he thought, that he was the best regent.
John III Vatatzes thought, that crusaders are weak and he dreamed to restore the Byzantium Empire and capture Constantinople.
So, they signed an alliance (the daughter of Ivan and the son of John were engaged) and attacked Latin Empire.

But Latin Empire in TTL was rather strong. And John of Brienne was an excellent warrior.
So, in TTL he defeated both enemies, but lack of resources to continue the war. (In OTL, he was besieged in Constantinopole and lost the last territories of the Empire)
In TTL the peace was signed - on the pre-war conditions.
Also, engagement of the son of John III Vatatzes was "changed" - now Theodore II got the young daughter of Peter of Courtenay.

In 1237, soon after the war, John of Brienne died.
 

Magnum

This period saw such an amount of instability, that you could plausibly arrive at pretty much any result you want
 

GeoffreyVillehardouin

Magnum said:
This period saw such an amount of instability, that you could plausibly arrive at pretty much any result you want
Click to expand...
I would like to have strong Nicaea Empire without Constantinople. And without Michael VIII Palaiologos, maybe :)

Let me please a silly question. Are you the same Magnum as on ФАИ? If you do not know what is it, then you are definitely not the same person - and sorry for disturb.
 

GeoffreyVillehardouin

So, let's start "a normal" timeline.
It will be much from OTL (at least, in the beginning). If you know it well - look for red font :)

Byzantium before falling of Constantinople:

1204
Crusaders captured Constantinople. Lands are divided between the Emperor, crusaders, Church and Venetian.
Many archons (Greek governors, mayors, just rich people) became independent.
Baldwin was elected as the first emperor of the Empire.
Baldwin went to the west - to Thrace.
His brother Henry went to the east - to Asia Minor.
Boniface went to the South - captured Thessalonica and proclaimed himself as the king of Thessalonica. Athens are captured as well, the new duke is Othon de la Roche.
Geoffrey Villehardouin landed in the south part of Greece and started invasion from that point.
 
AlternateEagle

AlternateEagle

Instead of despotate of Epirus we could get a larger kingdom of Albania :relievedface:

An interesting minor POD here is that the principality of Albania that existed either may be under Venice or would be even bigger than before. I would assume that Ohrid, Berat, Prizren, and other cities could fall under Albanian control. Although its contingent on the capacity of the Albanians to gain independence, given that the despotate of Epirus functioned as a "sponsor" and ally of sorts for them after the fourth crusade.
 
Last edited:

GeoffreyVillehardouin

1205
Thracia: bulgars attacked, defeated emperor Baldwin, captured most of Thracia.
Asia Minor: Henry defeated Theodore Laskaris, Henry is asked to return to "Europe" to fight against bulgars.
Constantinople: Henry is elected as a new emperor.
Thessaloniki: bulgars besieged the city, but cannot capture it.
Achaea: Boniface sent regiments to Geoffrey Villehardouin, he defeated greek and captured most of the region.
Epirus: Michael I Komnenos Doukas did not arrive, so there is some vacuum of the power in the region.
 

GeoffreyVillehardouin

1206 (No changes)
Constantinople: Henry attacked and defeated Theodore Laskaris (again), captured several sities.
Henry defeated bulgars in Thracia.
Thessaloniki: king Boniface re-captured Serra from bulgars.
Nicaea: Theodore Laskaris became the ruler of the city.

1207 (no changes)
Bulgaria: Kaloyan died. New king - Boril, but there were many leaders who did not agree.
Thessaloniki: king Boniface is killed by bulgars. New king is Demetrius, a child. There are many leaders who did not agree.
Nicaea:Theodore Laskaris re-captured cities from Henry. a two-year truce.

1208 (no changes)
Nicaea:Theodore Laskaris became the emperor.
Constantinople: Henry defeated bulgars.
Bulgaria is divided:
Boril is the king of the main part (North and West);
Alexuis Slav is an ally of Henry, ruled on the East;
Strez ruled in the South.
 

GeoffreyVillehardouin

It seems now I have an answer on WI - and I am doubt what TL is more interesting.
So, without Despotate of Epirus there are two main variants:
First one
Latin Empire is stronger (even if Henry cannot conquer all the Nicaea in 1210s, Peter of Courtenay came later with bigger army. Nicaea must adopt catholic faith (or some sort of Union of churches) or be conquered by crusaders. In this case, maybe Fifth Crusade may be more successful - Latin Empire has resource to help crusaders, they can bring resources of Nicaea (as vassal or as a part of the Empire) and, probably of Sultanate of Rum. These forces allow to attack Egypt earlier, with Andrew of Hungary - and either conquer Egypt or conclude "a good peace".
But Nicaea and Byzantium disappears in this variant.
It is sad.

Second one, if I try to save Nicaea
Latin Empire is not stronger - for example, there are much more conflicts between vassals of the Emperor, part of crusaders go to Fifth Crusade and die, there are additional conflicts with Serbs or Bulgarians...
In this case, when the war between Empires starts in 1220s (whatever is the reason, most probably - the question who must be an emperor), Thracian cities call for the emperor of Nicaea - and without Epirus they came Byzantium. And then Latin Empire collapses - probably even Constantinople is conquered by Nicaea. Maybe, Athens and Achaea can exist a bit longer, but I doubt.
So, Latin Empire disappears.
Possible variant - Bulgarians help crusaders... But it seems not so likely.
It looks like Byzantium wank :) Not so sad, but it is one more TL "Byzantium returns".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top