WI Empire of Nicaea stays in Anatolia?

ByzantineLover

New scenario I've been trying to think up. In 1261 the Empire of Nicaea took back Constantinople from the Latin Empire and much of the Balkans from the Bulgarians, Latins and Despotate of Epirus. But, if I remember right, they over-taxed and neglected their territories in Asia Minor, which led to an easier conquest of Asia Minor by the Seljuks and later the Ottomans.

What I'm wondering is, what would happen if the Nicaeans decided to focus on the Turks instead of the Latins?

A few scenarios I'd imagine would be:

1. Constantinople would be reconquered by the Despotate of Epirus, the only other successor state in a position to do so, as I think they were doing quite well against the Latins. But, how long could they hold onto it? Who would they fall to? The Bulgarians, the Hungarians, the Serbians, the Sicilians, Venice or Genoa?

2. Nicaea sticks to the coastal territories it's already got and becomes a great trading and naval power. That is, unless the Venetians and Genoese don't already have a monopoly on Aegean trade like in Avitus' TL.

3. Nicaea decides to gradually expand inland and deal with the Turkish threat, at least for a time. Perhaps they would try and seek an alliance or merging of kingdoms with Trebizond.

Any thoughts. I might need to brush up on my knowledge of Byzantium around this time.
 

Elfwine

Why would they focus on the Turks over the Latins? Their ultimate goal is retaking Constantinople and the rest of imperial territory.
 

eliphas8

Elfwine said:
Why would they focus on the Turks over the Latins? Their ultimate goal is retaking Constantinople and the rest of imperial territory.
Click to expand...

Possibly as a prelude to dealing with the crusaders, it's entirely possible the emperor of Nicaea could be far sighted enough to know that if they don't eliminate the Turkish front ruling the European lands at the same time will be untenable.
 

Tongera

eliphas8 said:
Possibly as a prelude to dealing with the crusaders, it's entirely possible the emperor of Nicaea could be far sighted enough to know that if they don't eliminate the Turkish front ruling the European lands at the same time will be untenable.
Click to expand...

That would be difficult, but not impossible. The most difficult parts are the Central Plateau.
 

Elfwine

eliphas8 said:
Possibly as a prelude to dealing with the crusaders, it's entirely possible the emperor of Nicaea could be far sighted enough to know that if they don't eliminate the Turkish front ruling the European lands at the same time will be untenable.
Click to expand...

There may be some of that, but the Turkish front was pretty stable in John III's time (thanks in part to the Mongols).
 

Herzen's love-child

eliphas8 said:
Possibly as a prelude to dealing with the crusaders, it's entirely possible the emperor of Nicaea could be far sighted enough to know that if they don't eliminate the Turkish front ruling the European lands at the same time will be untenable.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that that degree of prescience was possible, as OTL the Mongols had removed any immediate Turkish threat. Have the Mongols do less well so that the Anatolian Turks are more formidable (but weakened somewhat by the experience) and perhaps the Nicaeans will turn to tend to them first. But Epirus may become a more formidable threat in the meantime and there are always more Turks on the horizon...
 

Basileus Giorgios

eliphas8 said:
Possibly as a prelude to dealing with the crusaders, it's entirely possible the emperor of Nicaea could be far sighted enough to know that if they don't eliminate the Turkish front ruling the European lands at the same time will be untenable.
Click to expand...

Is it? That sounds a bit like us placing hindsight on the past. For the Nicaean state it would always be more worthwhile to expel the Latins from the City, rather than going after the by now pretty thoroughly Turkified central Anatolia.

So, I'm with Tongera when he says you have to physically prevent the Laskarids from getting their hands on Constantinople, and probably the best way to do this is to have it fall into the hands of a Balkan Orthodox state that can hold the city a lot more comfortably than the Latins can. Anyway, have that state inflict a number of pretty serious defeats on Nicaea, so that they more or less accept the status quo.

Getting them to turn inland is difficult, but doable, though I'd suggest that they might be more interested in sparring with Trebizond, Venice and Genoa for control of the Chersonese and the Aegean Isles, all of which are much wealthier and more worthwhile than central Anatolia. The Laskarid state IOTL proved pretty nicely that it's possibly to do very well as a regional state in western Anatolia without holding the plateau, so there's no need for them to go East, besides 21st century hindsight.
 

Consul Arrianus

Basileus Giorgios said:
Is it? That sounds a bit like us placing hindsight on the past. For the Nicaean state it would always be more worthwhile to expel the Latins from the City, rather than going after the by now pretty thoroughly Turkified central Anatolia.

So, I'm with Tongera when he says you have to physically prevent the Laskarids from getting their hands on Constantinople, and probably the best way to do this is to have it fall into the hands of a Balkan Orthodox state that can hold the city a lot more comfortably than the Latins can. Anyway, have that state inflict a number of pretty serious defeats on Nicaea, so that they more or less accept the status quo.

Getting them to turn inland is difficult, but doable, though I'd suggest that they might be more interested in sparring with Trebizond, Venice and Genoa for control of the Chersonese and the Aegean Isles, all of which are much wealthier and more worthwhile than central Anatolia. The Laskarid state IOTL proved pretty nicely that it's possibly to do very well as a regional state in western Anatolia without holding the plateau, so there's no need for them to go East, besides 21st century hindsight.
Click to expand...

But this Balkan Orthodox state should be Epirus. I don't think the Nicean Empire would accept a Bulgarian Rule over their imperial city.
 

Basileus Giorgios

Consul Arrianus said:
But this Balkan Orthodox state should be Epirus. I don't think the Nicean Empire would accept a Bulgarian Rule over their imperial city.
Click to expand...

Why would they be any more pleased with Epirus than Bulgaria? The bottom line is that a Nicaean regime will view anyone else who occupies Constantinople as being illegitimate barbarians, whether that occupying power is Greek, Latin or Slavic.
 

Tongera

Basileus Giorgios said:
Why would they be any more pleased with Epirus than Bulgaria? The bottom line is that a Nicaean regime will view anyone else who occupies Constantinople as being illegitimate barbarians, whether that occupying power is Greek, Latin or Slavic.
Click to expand...

Would they view fellow Greeks as barbarians though? They would still want the city, but not as much due to fellow Greeks having the city?
 

cimon

Consul Arrianus said:
If any of all the above named parties, then the Epirotes are the ones the Niceans would probably accept.
Click to expand...

That is one part of it to which I agree;of course then Epirus would have to deal with the Latin principalities of Peloponnese(Moreas) as well as the Bulgarians and probably Serbians...

Nicaea would have to cooperate with Trebizond and possibly Georgia for the complete elimination of the Turks in Asia Minor otherwise they would keep on coming;to that effect,very good relations with the Mongols should be seriously considered.A second stage with a certain accord between the three greek states is possible.
 

Basileus Giorgios

Tongera said:
Would they view fellow Greeks as barbarians though? They would still want the city, but not as much due to fellow Greeks having the city?
Click to expand...

Consul Arrianus said:
If any of all the above named parties, then the Epirotes are the ones the Niceans would probably accept.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, I think that from the Nicaean point of view the Epirote Greeks would definitely be better than the Bulgarians, and an order of magnitude better than the Latins. Doesn't mean they'd be particularly happy about the Epirotes being in charge, though, and I'm sure that the Nicaean court would try to portray the Epirotes as barbarians, with themselves as the only legitimate continuation of the Roman Empire.
 

el t

Nicaea

I see it developing almost like the Nasirid Sultanate of Granada in Spain. Stable, economically prosperous but with limited prospects of future expansion.
 

Consul Arrianus

What about preventing the disaster at Klokotnitsa to some extent? So the Niceans can still manage to recapture Constantinople, but just with the urban hinterland. Epirus and Bulgaria will still be important regional powers and Nicea isn't able to push further into the western balkans and has to concentrate on Asia Minor?
 

Emperor Constantine

Even if another nation like Bulgaria or Epirus takes Constantinople, the Nicaeans are still going to want it. Constantinople is a symbol of legitimacy. The empire could stay in Anatolia for a time but not permanently. The best U could hope for is a far thinking Emperor focusing on the Turks first like in Basileus444's Age of Miracles. Maybe the Europeans send more aid to the Latin Empire. Another idea is to have the heir to the throne rule the Anatolian parts of the empire, sort of like how Henry VII sent his son to rule Wales to train him to be King, except it turns out better.
 

Elfwine

Consul Arrianus said:
What about preventing the disaster at Klokotnitsa to some extent? So the Niceans can still manage to recapture Constantinople, but just with the urban hinterland. Epirus and Bulgaria will still be important regional powers and Nicea isn't able to push further into the western balkans and has to concentrate on Asia Minor?
Click to expand...

Nicaea unable to push further is a Nicaea too weakened to hold much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top