AHC: Latest PoD for a Roman Reconquest of Egypt

Post Muslim conquest, when is the latest the Eastern Empire could plausibly retake Egypt?

At a guess I'd say a more successful Macedonian dynasty- either a longer lived Romanos II springboarding from Syria down the coast or a successor to Basil taking advantage of the Seljuk invasion of the East (assuming that, with political stability and leadership, the Turks will be diverted more towards Egypt and the Levant than Anatolia), or perhaps even during the Crusader period if the Normans are butterflied and the Empire can keep a tighter leash on the Latins.

The Ottomans were able to take Egypt with territory roughly analogous to Basil's empire, after all, so if Egypt is as weak as it was under the Fatimids whilst Constantinople is strong (as is posited in a Macedonian PoD) then I think they could manage it.
 
In The Revival of Rhomaion: An Age of Miracles, Byzantium recovers after the Fourth Crusade, and conquers Egypt in 1501 (having previously conquered all Asia Minor, the Balkans, Sicily and Naples, and Venice).

Actually, given the long-term survival of Byzantium, and its return to serious power status, the reconquest of Egypt could happen at any time down to the present. It's just a matter of when affairs flow that way.
 
One issue is that Constantinople never successfully annexed territory with many Muslims (border regions in Syria aside, which does not compare to the scale of Egypt), and so they need to actually have a functional policy on that to pull this off successfully at any time after 750s or so. I think the late Macedonian Empire had the capacity to conquer Egypt, if the Egyptian state in question was weak. This would involve some form of Fatimid screw or them just failing to conquer Egypt, leaving it under much poorer leadership. That would leave the Romans as the undisputed major power in the Eastern Med until the Turks enter that picture, and they could actually make a grab for the Levant under someone like Tzimiskes, maybe pushing all the way to Egypt if the resistance was weak. The elephant in the room is of course Bulgaria, but a distraction there could buy them time. OTL Tzimiskes went all the way to Tyre if I recall right-and could probably make it to Egypt itself with a bit more luck+no Fatimids.

The Ottomans did not have a major religious difference with the Egyptians, and Egypt was also in a somewhat poorer state at that time, so I don't think a tenth or eleventh century Roman conquest will go as smoothly as Selim's. It is however not impossible. Post Manzikert, I am skeptical about a conquest being possible without Romania successfully becoming a gunpower Empire. It is exceedingly unlike to be permanent even then without major demographic changes (AoM Rhomania does lose Egypt to Copts who then have a major muslim rebellion that they could not handle without the Greeks marching in).

(full disclosure: my TL has Basil II conquer Egypt in early 1000s, but that was achieved only through butterflies that lead to a much stronger Roman presence in the Levant from 960s and a delayed Fatimid conquest of Egypt. Add someone like Al-Hakim and Egypt suddenly looks very conquerable-though very difficult to hold).
 
What about Manuel Komnenos' expedition in 1169-1170?
The chances of that expedition succeeding was next to zero.The crusaders weren't serious about that expedition at all.They were trying to milk as much money from the Romans as possible and only went along with it in order to appease Manuel and maintain the aid money.The crusaders in fact wanted to screw the Romans and to conquer Egypt all for themselves.Even if this disfunctional alliance succeeded,there's still the question of who gets what.
 
Post Muslim conquest, when is the latest the Eastern Empire could plausibly retake Egypt?

At a guess I'd say a more successful Macedonian dynasty- either a longer lived Romanos II springboarding from Syria down the coast or a successor to Basil taking advantage of the Seljuk invasion of the East (assuming that, with political stability and leadership, the Turks will be diverted more towards Egypt and the Levant than Anatolia), or perhaps even during the Crusader period if the Normans are butterflied and the Empire can keep a tighter leash on the Latins.

The Ottomans were able to take Egypt with territory roughly analogous to Basil's empire, after all, so if Egypt is as weak as it was under the Fatimids whilst Constantinople is strong (as is posited in a Macedonian PoD) then I think they could manage it.

Probably the Comnenid Restoration. If the Byzantines focused more on retaking the Anatolian interior and were successful in doing so, they'd end up controlling much the same territory as they did before Manzikert. After that it's a matter of consolidation, waiting until the Levant/Egypt is weak and unable to defend itself properly, and most importantly not cocking up enough to lose either Greece or Anatolia again.
 
Top