Some mid 1100s Europe questions

[Zioneer]

So I'm thinking of starting a surviving independent Sicily TL (starting with a Norman Sicily PoD). The basic gist of it is William "the Bad" is actually tutored correctly and is vastly more competent. Or I could have him replaced with one of his brothers (even illegitimate ones like Simon of Taranto. While he has equally competent opponents like Frederick Barbarossa and so forth, I think a competent Sicilian monarchy could be a powerful regional power.

But first, I've got a couple of questions about the general time period (mid 1100s) of this POD.

1) What were the attitudes of the major European nations at the time (France, the Spanish kingdoms (Aragon, Castille, etc), Hungary, and so forth) towards Sicily? I know the Papacy, Byzantium, and the HRE were generally hostile, but other than that I don't know much.

2) What was the English attitude towards Sicily? Positive, negative, or neutral?

3) From what I understand, France was somewhat fractured at this point, but how fractured was it? Could a combination of the Plantagenants and rebellious regional nobles (like say, Toulouse) break France apart for good?

4) What could break the rivalry between the Byzantines and the Sicilians? Or at least cause them to stop raiding/undermining each other?

5) Can the Sicilian government (specifically the over-powerful barons) be reformed? I want a competent William/Simon/etc to reform the kingdom into some kind of Sicilian variant of the Byzantine form of government (including bureaucrats and so forth), but I'm not sure how feasible that is.

6) I need a basic overview of the Middle East at this point; I'm not very familiar with mid 1100s Middle East besides the obvious things (the Kingdom of Jerusalem being a thing, Emperor Manuel, etc)

7) Is there any way I can keep the Byzantines strong enough to keep going, but weak enough to not bother the Sicilians?

I have other questions, but I've forgotten them at the moment, so here are the questions for now.

 

[Zioneer]

Bumping this with a further question: How was Egypt and Ethopia doing in the 1100s?

 

[Deleted member 67076]

Couple of answer off the top of my head:

-Yes, France can be broken, although I must say that you'd do well to have France ally with the Sicilians as that will give a counter to the German Emperors and allow for easier expansion north.

-Its difficult to stop animosity between the Byzantines and the Normans as South Italy is the gateway to intervention on the Italian peninsula, helps secure the Adriatic sea and is an easy source of soldiers. But the Byzantines were always on the pragmatic side, so if you make the kingdom of Sicily strong enough you're going to make attacking them less of an attractive prospect while conversely making allying a better idea. Easiest way to do this would be to have Sicily conquer more of Italy (having a border at the Po would send a message that these guys weren't worth messing around).

-Governments can be reformed, but it will take some time. Its not impossible to hire Byzantine or Venetian/Genoese bureaucrats and scholars to aid in this goal. (Maybe even from the Muslim world) Also, take a look at what Charles I of Hungary did to centralize his realm and make it far more efficient and wealthier (due to the royal court receiving more funds allowing them to better manage the economy)

-On the Mid East: In Al Andalus and the Magreb you had the Almoravids, followed by the Almohads. The Zirids were in charge of Ifriqiya until the Almoravids conquered them. In Egypt, we have the Fatimids who were now reduced to just Egypt. Mesopotamia and the Levant were divided; you have the Kingdom of Jerusalem and other crusader states, but in the Muslim realms we have the Seljuqs who dominated the area (although in practice only controlled Northern Mesopotamia, the Abbasids were quickly rebounding and had of most of Iraq south of Mosul. Note that if the Mongols don't come the Abbasids would have pushed the Seljuqs out permanently). Persia was ruled by the Gurid dynasty, but were later replaced by the Khwarzm dynasty who also had much of the Central Asian cities and modern day Afghanistan. Yemen and Oman were doing their own thing. Im kind of embarrassed to say it, but I dont' know who controlled the Hedjaz and the holy cities at this time.

-Again, to keep the Byzantines strong enough but not strong enough to attack the Sicilians is easy: Make Sicily stronger. If you're worried about Byzantine intervention that's easily solvable by having John II live longer; his foreign policy was mostly directed towards Anatolia and Syria. The longer he stays the longer Byzantium is focused on those areas and gives the Normans the time they need to consolidate and expand. And the more damage they do to the Rum sultanate the weaker the Seljuqs in Mesopotamia get, which means the Abbasids get stronger and start ripping more and more chunks away from the Seluqs, making Rum weaker in turn, and the Byzantines more focused on eastern matters.

-Egypt was in slight decline under the Fatimids in terms of military power. But the Fatimids did build plenty of schools and I think there was an intellectual flourishing. Not sure on Ethiopia.

 

[Thoresby]

1) What were the attitudes of the major European nations at the time (France, the Spanish kingdoms (Aragon, Castille, etc), Hungary, and so forth) towards Sicily? I know the Papacy, Byzantium, and the HRE were generally hostile, but other than that I don't know much.

France, Castille and Hungary I don't know about but I assume neutral considering the distances. The HRE and Aragon were generally hostile, the HRE because of it's desire to rule all of Italy and Aragon because of naval and trade rivalry in the Western Med. The big issue is the Papacy, on one hand the Pope's liked having Sicily around as so they could play Sicily off against the HRE. On the other hand Sicily was closer and more threatening than the HRE.

2) What was the English attitude towards Sicily? Positive, negative, or neutral?

On an individual level positive. It was a culturally linked place to stop off at on the pilgrimage to the Holy Land. But distance meant there wasn't opportunity for much more.

3) From what I understand, France was somewhat fractured at this point, but how fractured was it? Could a combination of the Plantagenants and rebellious regional nobles (like say, Toulouse) break France apart for good?

Maybe. While the King of France had a serious problem with overmighty subjects the idea of the Kingdom of France as a entity was reasonably strong. But you could have France go the way of the post Renaissance HRE and become a very, very loose federation, with Burgundy, England/Gascony and Toulouse playing the parts of Saxony, Prussia and Bavaria.

4) What could break the rivalry between the Byzantines and the Sicilians? Or at least cause them to stop raiding/undermining each other?

In the short term yes, have the Sicilians threatened by the Pope or HRE and have the Byzantine's focused on Sejuks but in the long run both the Sicilians and the Byzantines wanted to be the premier Christian power in the central to eastern Med.

5) Can the Sicilian government (specifically the over-powerful barons) be reformed? I want a competent William/Simon/etc to reform the kingdom into some kind of Sicilian variant of the Byzantine form of government (including bureaucrats and so forth), but I'm not sure how feasible that is.

No, at least not in the short term. Government structures reflect the underlying social structure and taking a feudal society and trying to turn it into the Byzantine's theocratic, bureaucratic absolutist structure would be the work of centuries and frankly not desirable. If you want to boost Sicily have them copy or pre-empt some of the governmental reforms that their fellows Normans were doing in England that enabled an otherwise poor and isolated island to take on the 800 pound gorilla of Medieval Europe France.

7) Is there any way I can keep the Byzantines strong enough to keep going, but weak enough to not bother the Sicilians?

Easy, avoid the disaster of the 4th Crusade and the Byzantine Empire is sustainable in the medium term. While the Angeloi were pretty disastrous the state was still functioning and the material was there for a bounce back once someone competent took the throne as had happened repeatedly before. It was the Crusaders taking Constantinople and splintering the Empire that started the death spiral.

 

[StarshooterX]

First of all, good luck on your TL! We have a prominent lack of Norman Sicily TLs.

Before I even say anything else, I'd recommend you do a great amount of research into this period. The high middle ages is one of my favorites in history, and you'd be surprised how much fun doing research can be (indeed, I've been so caught up in research I've been lax at updating).

1) as always, their opinions varied based on the politics of the time. Up until they had claims to the land, France could care less for Sicily, and you can be sure states like England or castille had other things to worry about.

Now, for powers like Byzantium or the papacy, it was different. Sicily had a rather annoying habit of antagonizing its neighbors. Since it sounds like you want to bring Byzantium and Sicily closer together, getting them to stop invading the Balkans will go a long way. That's actually not as hard as you think~ if Sicily does better in north Africa, they'll have to expend more resources keeping Tunisia and that area occupied, instead of using them against the Romans.

You'll also probably want to get if Manuel komnenos before he invades Sicily. For a Roman, he was extremely western oriented. A more eastern oriented basileus, more like John, could ignore Sicily. This also helps your goal of a stronger Byzantine empire, as without Manuels mismanagement Rome is in a much better place. With a pod in the 1140s or so, this isn't that hard either. You can probably wrap in a Sicilian victory in north Africa, a different successor to John, and a more intellectual friendly William all into one.

5 (considering I pretty much already answered 1,2,3,4): reform on the level you're suggesting certainly isn't impossible in Sicily. OTL, the kingdom had a large Greek influence, and with a peaceful decade or two between Rome and Sicily, it's not too much of a stretch to see a guy like William really shaking things up in favor of the more centralized Romans. This can go a number of ways, but critically, you'll need to curb the aristocracy in a process that might abandon a lot of the "Norman ness" of Sicily.

6) the middle east is a big area. The fatimids are going into decline, with factionalism that gave way to the mamelukes IOTL. The Second Crusade is happening around the time of your POD, and it's probably going to go roughly the same as OTL. This means a powerful Zenghid dynasty in Mesopotamia with a grudge against the crusader states. Central Anatolia is under the sultan of rum and the various Turkish chieftains, who pay lip service to Constantinople.

7) as long as you avoid disasters like the fourth crusade, it shouldn't be hard for the Romans to fully subjugate the Turks, in time. With Anatolia secure, they will be the b greatest power in Europe easily, but a friendly Sicily can use this to their advantage.

There are a lot of fun things to play with in this era, and I wish you luck.

 

[Zioneer]

I like all of these ideas/advice, and I'll probably incorporate many of them.

Quick question for Starshooter though: the majority of resources I have to read up on this time period consist of Wikipedia, of the Alexiad, of the (actually quite good) podcast Norman Centuries and the Norman Sicily books by John Julius Norwich. What further research would you recommend, and where? Preferably I'd like online sources that don't require money, but I agree that research is fun, so I can get a couple more books if needed.

A couple more questions:

1) I want to include the Cathars, the Sicilian Muslims, and the Jews in some way, but I'm not sure how. My initial notes provided for a more militant/populist Cathars, but I'm not sure how that would work. My basic idea is that I'd like Catharism to be a popular faith that is still inclined to defend itself. Similarly, I think the Sicilian Normans will be inclined to be tolerant, and even experiment with having non-Catholic faiths dominant in small parts of the kingdom.

2) Could the Sicilians expand westward, into Corsica/Sardina, or even the Balearic Islands?

3) Is there any way to make the Angeloi not disastrous?

4) How could I make the Normans more successful in North Africa? As I understand, they had to abandon it due to the HRE, Papacy and Byzantines all piling on Sicily. Could they settle it with immigrants from different places?

5) How much sense would it make for the Sicilians either to establish a small enclave of conquest in Croatian Dalmatia, or to invite Croats into their kingdom?

6) I also need a name for this TL; I'm looking at a poetic name that somehow combines a sense of splendor (like John Julius Norwich's "Kingdom in the Sun") with a sense of... power, I guess?

 

[Janprimus]

With respect to France, I tend to agree with Thoresby. France as an entity was quite strong, but the monarchy could be quite weak.

 

[Tibi088]

About Hungary: you can forget it for this time period. Hungary has some internal conflicts and outside the country is mostly interested in Halics (eastern Galicia). Regarding Italy i know that there were some difficulties with the Pope because of Croatia - the Pope thought it should have become his vassal. And most likely there were problems with Venice because of Dalmatia. Hungary had nothing to do with Italy proper or Sicily and this only changed after in the 14th century the Anjous became the rulers of Hungary. Before that Hungary had nothing to do with Italy and Sicily and without the Anjous its likely it would never had.

 

[Zioneer]

About Hungary: you can forget it for this time period. Hungary has some internal conflicts and outside the country is mostly interested in Halics (eastern Galicia). Regarding Italy i know that there were some difficulties with the Pope because of Croatia - the Pope thought it should have become his vassal. And most likely there were problems with Venice because of Dalmatia. Hungary had nothing to do with Italy proper or Sicily and this only changed after in the 14th century the Anjous became the rulers of Hungary. Before that Hungary had nothing to do with Italy and Sicily and without the Anjous its likely it would never had.

Hmm... It looks like Geza II was a supporter of the Sicilians against the Byzantines and HRE. Though of course Hungary during his reign was still internally weak. So maybe a stronger Hungary in alliance with Sicily could scare off already eastern-minded Byzantines?

Also, my basic concept with William of Sicily reforming the Sicilian kingdom to be somewhat like the Byzantines (with a Sicilian flair) leads me to a few questions. First, what are some groups that the Sicilian monarch could empower in order to weaken the power of the barons? Second, as I understand, Sicily's basic military force was Norman Knights backed by untrained peasants and Muslim skirmishers, right? Could some sort of military reformation change their military force, ala the Byzantines?

And one more question: in this Wiki article on the Cumans, it seems like the Cumans played a large part in the history of the medieval Balkans; could they play a role in strengthening possible allies of Sicily (Hungary, the Serbs, etc?)

 

[Deleted member 67076]

Also, my basic concept with William of Sicily reforming the Sicilian kingdom to be somewhat like the Byzantines (with a Sicilian flair) leads me to a few questions. First, what are some groups that the Sicilian monarch could empower in order to weaken the power of the barons? Second, as I understand, Sicily's basic military force was Norman Knights backed by untrained peasants and Muslim skirmishers, right? Could some sort of military reformation change their military force, ala the Byzantines?

Here's an idea: Why not look to the reforms the Sassanids did to strengthen the monarchy? They managed to take a relatively feudal Parthian Empire and centralize it to a large degree while still having a large and powerful class of fighting nobles like the barons.

Re: Empowering groups? What about merchants and smallholders to play off the nobles? Naples makes for a good port and you could muscle in on the trade Genoa and Venice were getting. Sicily has more than enough manpower to compete with them. All it needs are the institutions. And smallholders of course are much easier to tax and control. If you do something like a Theme system where there's a trained militia of peasants available at all times that might work. Or how about Men at arms equivalents? (ok that might be a bit too expensive for the state without the right financial reforms)

As for the military reforms, absolutely.

And one more question: in this Wiki article on the Cumans, it seems like the Cumans played a large part in the history of the medieval Balkans; could they play a role in strengthening possible allies of Sicily (Hungary, the Serbs, etc?)

As a steppe horde that seems unlikely. Its in the Horde's interest to keep its neighbors weak to extract tribute. You'd have to change the whole organization of the Cuman state to want to strengthen others.

 

[Tibi088]

Hmm... It looks like Geza II was a supporter of the Sicilians against the Byzantines and HRE. Though of course Hungary during his reign was still internally weak. So maybe a stronger Hungary in alliance with Sicily could scare off already eastern-minded Byzantines?

Also, my basic concept with William of Sicily reforming the Sicilian kingdom to be somewhat like the Byzantines (with a Sicilian flair) leads me to a few questions. First, what are some groups that the Sicilian monarch could empower in order to weaken the power of the barons? Second, as I understand, Sicily's basic military force was Norman Knights backed by untrained peasants and Muslim skirmishers, right? Could some sort of military reformation change their military force, ala the Byzantines?

And one more question: in this Wiki article on the Cumans, it seems like the Cumans played a large part in the history of the medieval Balkans; could they play a role in strengthening possible allies of Sicily (Hungary, the Serbs, etc?)

Yes you are right. I only thought of Italy but you could use Hungary against Byzantium.

 

[Zioneer]

A few more questions:

-What kind of military did the various nations of Europe field? I know I can get a pretty good overview of the Byzantine armies (and Sicily's, of course), but what did everyone else tend to field? Was there any large difference in say Hungary's military and France's military (besides equipment and numbers?) Were there any large regional differences, such as the armies fielded from Croatia/Dalmatia, or the armies fielded in Aquitaine compared to the rest of France, or southern Kievan Rus as compared to Novgorod?

-Also, could a reformed Sicilian army have clearly defined ranks and organization like the Byzantine army did?

-Are there any other 1100s PoDs that I could combine with the "competent Sicilian kings past Roger II" PoDs? Maybe the Byzantine Emperor Manuel (and any of his sons who could replace him) die sometime in the 1150s and they are replaced by a Komneos who focuses more on the east?

-Religion-wise, can Sicily continue to operate as a tolerant "paradise" for non-Catholics? I know it wasn't as good as it seemed, especially in the later years, but could Sicily serve as a place of refuge for religious groups fleeing from wherever they were from?

-What are some good sources on this period of time?

I know I'm forgetting a few things, but these are the questions I've thought of at the moment

 

[Basileus444]

I like all of these ideas/advice, and I'll probably incorporate many of them.

Quick question for Starshooter though: the majority of resources I have to read up on this time period consist of Wikipedia, of the Alexiad, of the (actually quite good) podcast Norman Centuries and the Norman Sicily books by John Julius Norwich. What further research would you recommend, and where? Preferably I'd like online sources that don't require money, but I agree that research is fun, so I can get a couple more books if needed.

A couple more questions:

1) I want to include the Cathars, the Sicilian Muslims, and the Jews in some way, but I'm not sure how. My initial notes provided for a more militant/populist Cathars, but I'm not sure how that would work. My basic idea is that I'd like Catharism to be a popular faith that is still inclined to defend itself. Similarly, I think the Sicilian Normans will be inclined to be tolerant, and even experiment with having non-Catholic faiths dominant in small parts of the kingdom.

2) Could the Sicilians expand westward, into Corsica/Sardina, or even the Balearic Islands?

3) Is there any way to make the Angeloi not disastrous?

4) How could I make the Normans more successful in North Africa? As I understand, they had to abandon it due to the HRE, Papacy and Byzantines all piling on Sicily. Could they settle it with immigrants from different places?

5) How much sense would it make for the Sicilians either to establish a small enclave of conquest in Croatian Dalmatia, or to invite Croats into their kingdom?

6) I also need a name for this TL; I'm looking at a poetic name that somehow combines a sense of splendor (like John Julius Norwich's "Kingdom in the Sun") with a sense of... power, I guess?

You might be able to pick up Kinnamos' and Choniates' histories from your local university library. They naturally focus on the Byzantines but they both cover the 1147 invasion and Choniates the 1185 one as well. Admittedly most of my knowledge of the Sicilian Normans is stuff picked up on the side from Byzantine studies.

If Sicily is willing to tangle with Genoa and/or Pisa expansion into Sardinia or Corsica is possible. I believe the Balaerics were still Muslim as of 1150 so those would be a good target.

It is absurdly easy to butterfly away the Angeloi. Isaac only became Emperor because Andronikos Komnenos sent one of his courtiers to arrest Isaac, Isaac panicked, managed to kill the courtier and fled to Hagia Sophia. He was made Emperor by the crowd.

If you wanted to keep the Angeloi, Isaac had more brothers than Alexios III. Several were killed by Andronikos Komnenos. They all can't have been idiots...hopefully.

One way to ease the Norman situation is to stop them from continually attacking the Byzantines, 1081, 1107, 1147, 1185, literally once a generation. The Byzantines aren't going to put up with that and aside from Manuel's expedition the Byzantines spent a lot of time and money egging on the Germans to attack the Normans. An eastern-oriented Basileus like John II would be happy to ignore the Sicilians, if they'd let him. The OTL Sicilians decidedly did not.

A Sicilian Croatia is a very bad idea, unless the goal is to pointlessly piss off both the Hungarians and Venetians. Rule #1 of Venetian foreign policy in the 1100s is nobody controls both sides of the straits of Otranto.

As for a TL title, I suggest writing the first couple of updates before posting and then go through and see if any phrases you used strike your fancy. That's how I chose 'An Age of Miracles'.

 

[Kingpoleon]

I like all of these ideas/advice, and I'll probably incorporate many of them.

Quick question for Starshooter though: the majority of resources I have to read up on this time period consist of Wikipedia, of the Alexiad, of the (actually quite good) podcast Norman Centuries and the Norman Sicily books by John Julius Norwich. What further research would you recommend, and where? Preferably I'd like online sources that don't require money, but I agree that research is fun, so I can get a couple more books if needed.

A couple more questions:

1) I want to include the Cathars, the Sicilian Muslims, and the Jews in some way, but I'm not sure how. My initial notes provided for a more militant/populist Cathars, but I'm not sure how that would work. My basic idea is that I'd like Catharism to be a popular faith that is still inclined to defend itself. Similarly, I think the Sicilian Normans will be inclined to be tolerant, and even experiment with having non-Catholic faiths dominant in small parts of the kingdom.

2) Could the Sicilians expand westward, into Corsica/Sardina, or even the Balearic Islands?

Yes. At large, the biggest Sicilian wank one could do is one involving those four, the south of France(even if just a few minor parts here and there), and most of the east Italian coast. If you want to go the whole way there, Aragon and more Algerian and Tunisian colonies aren't too implausible.

3) Is there any way to make the Angeloi not disastrous?

4) How could I make the Normans more successful in North Africa? As I understand, they had to abandon it due to the HRE, Papacy and Byzantines all piling on Sicily. Could they settle it with immigrants from different places?

Weaken the local Africans first. Then, find a way to distract them. A more powerful Hungary for the first and last, along with a strong Poland and Persia, respectively, would do the trick. The Papacy will need major religious crises to distract it.

5) How much sense would it make for the Sicilians either to establish a small enclave of conquest in Croatian Dalmatia, or to invite Croats into their kingdom?

Very little. The best you could hope for is to find a Venetian change there... Perhaps get the Venetians to be a Sicilian puppet.

6) I also need a name for this TL; I'm looking at a poetic name that somehow combines a sense of splendor (like John Julius Norwich's "Kingdom in the Sun") with a sense of... power, I guess?
"The Kings of the Mediterranean; Divinely Inspired"

Replies in BOLD.

I did the more major ones, mostly territorial, right now. The others should be easy to find with a little more research, but I will answer them tomorrow. I hope I helped some!

 

[Zioneer]

One last question, is there a good dictionary that translates words into Arabic, but with a Latin alphabet? I want Sicily to use a few Arabic words for various things, but I can't read Arabic at all.