Constans II was emperor of the Byzantine Empire from 641 to 668 arguably one of the harder times for the empire. As far as i am aware he tried to refocuse the empire on the mediterannean and atleast partly in the west and planned to retake italy. What if he was successfull with his plans, what would be the consequences, and also what POD could lead him to the most success ? A Sort of best case secenario for him (without it beign a wank or asb) Avoiding his assasination would probably not be enough for him to be successfull.
 
Constans tried to conquer the Duchy of Benevento in 663. Should he be successful, the Roman position in Italy would be much stronger, which could have interesting ripple effects in, say, Carthage and Sicily. His assassination would likely be butterflied too.
 
Best case scenario for constans would be in his early reing where he takes alexanderia back have the battle of Nikiou be a roman victory this would mean the end of Muslim expansion but he would Manuel would have defeated a 15 000 strong Muslim force and would have secured Alexandria even if it didn't last for more then 20 years it has dramatic effects aside from a force of 15 000 being destroyed

Muawiyah wouldn't have northern egypt as a base to make his navy(the one he used a couple of years after the battle ) and would only have syria , so he his raids would be minor anything like the battle of the mast is averted or happens because the Romans ambush them.

In any case the Romans remain master of the Mediterranean constans not being in such a dire situation can deal with the slavs ( he did later in the timeline and defeated them )
maybe he can make a peace like when he his son made one with Muawiyah if the first Fitna occurs around this time
With more men and recourses constans could conquer the duchy of benvento and have secured southern Italy

so the butterflies would be that the Arab dominance of the east Mediterranean is stoped or very delayed , advancements in to north Africa are also delayed
south Italy is secured

A more realistic one would be he wins the battle of the mast or makes the Muslim win a pyhirch victory , Muslim naval supremacy on both cases would be limited allowing for no deep raids to Anatolia or any campaing in to north Africa for a while
 
Best case scenario for constans would be in his early reing where he takes alexanderia back have the battle of Nikiou be a roman victory this would mean the end of Muslim expansion but he would Manuel would have defeated a 15 000 strong Muslim force and would have secured Alexandria even if it didn't last for more then 20 years it has dramatic effects aside from a force of 15 000 being destroyed

Muawiyah wouldn't have northern egypt as a base to make his navy(the one he used a couple of years after the battle ) and would only have syria , so he his raids would be minor anything like the battle of the mast is averted or happens because the Romans ambush them.

In any case the Romans remain master of the Mediterranean constans not being in such a dire situation can deal with the slavs ( he did later in the timeline and defeated them )
maybe he can make a peace like when he his son made one with Muawiyah if the first Fitna occurs around this time
With more men and recourses constans could conquer the duchy of benvento and have secured southern Italy

so the butterflies would be that the Arab dominance of the east Mediterranean is stoped or very delayed , advancements in to north Africa are also delayed
south Italy is secured

A more realistic one would be he wins the battle of the mast or makes the Muslim win a pyhirch victory , Muslim naval supremacy on both cases would be limited allowing for no deep raids to Anatolia or any campaing in to north Africa for a while
Interesting, tho i am really not positive of he could hold egypt long term given the religous strive in the area and the vigerous attacks from the muslims, i think a decisive victory in the battle of the masts might be more realistic, do you think without egypt but naval supremacy it is possible to hold north africa or even counter attack egypt ?
 
Interesting, tho i am really not positive of he could hold egypt long term given the religous strive in the area and the vigerous attacks from the muslims, i think a decisive victory in the battle of the masts might be more realistic, do you think without egypt but naval supremacy it is possible to hold north africa or even counter attack egypt ?
If constans wins
Even if Muawiyah survives there would be problems this isn't 670s he hasn't built this reputation yet sure he has raided from late 640s but now hasm Lost most of his navy this early on migth lead to assassintion
or if the first Fitna occurs he migth not win

as for north Africa the more you move to the west the more there is a narrow strip of land where all the important centers are and in the interior a lot of angry Berbers I mean even when the Muslim took Carthage the Romans could still use their navy and took the city back at least for a while the complete conquest of north Africa was not completed until the 20 years anarchy where as the name implies the instability of the Byzantines allowed this .

Also Armenia migth occur difirent instead of giving up with him reinvigorated from the battle of the mast he could sent. a counter attack to Armenia ( he did when the first Fitna was occuring and was successful )
 
If constans wins
Even if Muawiyah survives there would be problems this isn't 670s he hasn't built this reputation yet sure he has raided from late 640s but now hasm Lost most of his navy this early on migth lead to assassintion
or if the first Fitna occurs he migth not win

as for north Africa the more you move to the west the more there is a narrow strip of land where all the important centers are and in the interior a lot of angry Berbers I mean even when the Muslim took Carthage the Romans could still use their navy and took the city back at least for a while the complete conquest of north Africa was not completed until the 20 years anarchy where as the name implies the instability of the Byzantines allowed this .

Also Armenia migth occur difirent instead of giving up with him reinvigorated from the battle of the mast he could sent. a counter attack to Armenia ( he did when the first Fitna was occuring and was successful )
would this still mean that the focus of the empire shifts more west ? Or would he now try to take egypt and the east back first and foremost ? I read somewhere that Constans II more or less gave up the east do you know if thats true ?
 
would this still mean that the focus of the empire shifts more west ? Or would he now try to take egypt and the east back first and foremost ? I read somewhere that Constans II more or less gave up the east do you know if thats true ?
he did give up on certian parts of the east like i mentioned armenia is one example but that he fully gave up and wanted to go to sicily is a rumor a deadly rumor for him but still a rumor
as for egypt he migth re try a thing similar to 646
 
Interesting, tho i am really not positive of he could hold egypt long term given the religous strive in the area and the vigerous attacks from the muslims, i think a decisive victory in the battle of the masts might be more realistic, do you think without egypt but naval supremacy it is possible to hold north africa or even counter attack egypt ?

It is not like there is any Egyptian revolts though... The Egyptian population was also being appeased at the time by him and Heraclius who both took positions aimed at healing the schisms related to the nature of Christ's Divinity. This caused disgust in Italy and in the Frankish world, not to mention among some major prelates in Syria. It however was going to at least for the time lessen the tensions regarding religion with Egypt.

The main issue is an Arab counter against Imperial Egypt. The Empire cannot afford to permit the Arabs breathing space and must take the offensive more or less constantly and by doing this, they may hasten the collapse of the opposing Caliphate and with this, the return of a counter-Iranian state that may be able to ally with the Empire in crushing the Arabs with a horizontal alliance.
 
It is not like there is any Egyptian revolts though... The Egyptian population was also being appeased at the time by him and Heraclius who both took positions aimed at healing the schisms related to the nature of Christ's Divinity. This caused disgust in Italy and in the Frankish world, not to mention among some major prelates in Syria. It however was going to at least for the time lessen the tensions regarding religion with Egypt.

The main issue is an Arab counter against Imperial Egypt. The Empire cannot afford to permit the Arabs breathing space and must take the offensive more or less constantly and by doing this, they may hasten the collapse of the opposing Caliphate and with this, the return of a counter-Iranian state that may be able to ally with the Empire in crushing the Arabs with a horizontal alliance.
he already losted by mast in 655 and sassanid persia has already falleen unless you used the Nikiou pod i can still see the first fitna occurs it migth help the empire.
 
he already losted by mast in 655 and sassanid persia has already falleen unless you used the Nikiou pod i can still see the first fitna occurs it migth help the empire.

Oh no, I mean with the Arab realm hurried by wars from the west, there is possibility of a rebellion in Northern Iran and or a recovery for the Zunbil-Hepthalshahs, which will permit an already overextending Caliphate to feel issues and have to resume a more conservative position geopolitcally.
 
Oh no, I mean with the Arab realm hurried by wars from the west, there is possibility of a rebellion in Northern Iran and or a recovery for the Zunbil-Hepthalshahs, which will permit an already overextending Caliphate to feel issues and have to resume a more conservative position geopolitcally.
yeah but even then the caliphate still had advantage maybe after alt mast Constans just pushed for a preferential peace
 
so the best bet for constans is to hope continued attacks combined with internal issues could break the caliphate ?
no the best is a 642 pod but a realistic one could be as i said roman victory at mast and the first fitna occurs around at the same time allowing the emperor to make counter offensives
 
A big thing
It is not like there is any Egyptian revolts though... The Egyptian population was also being appeased at the time by him and Heraclius who both took positions aimed at healing the schisms related to the nature of Christ's Divinity. This caused disgust in Italy and in the Frankish world, not to mention among some major prelates in Syria. It however was going to at least for the time lessen the tensions regarding religion with Egypt.

The main issue is an Arab counter against Imperial Egypt. The Empire cannot afford to permit the Arabs breathing space and must take the offensive more or less constantly and by doing this, they may hasten the collapse of the opposing Caliphate and with this, the return of a counter-Iranian state that may be able to ally with the Empire in crushing the Arabs with a horizontal alliance.
Honestly yeah, the monoenergism thing helped massively. And if the Heraclians are more successful it could REALLY take root, I think.
23c8320a6e41855e905470855e84c0ff.png
 
Top