AHC: Lombard Sicily

IOTL, the Lombards conquered nearly all of Italy, but, unlike the Ostrogoths before them, not Sicily. Your challenge is to have Sicily conquered and ruled by either a united Lombard Kingdom or an independant Duke.

Any thoughts?
 
The Ostrogoths didn't conquer Sicily, strictly speaking. It was just a consequences of Odoacer's demise, who previously to his death proclaimed himself (or his son i dont remember) roman emperor, thus enraging local romans who decided to change side. In order for the Lombards to conquer Sicily you need them to strengthen their hold on southern Italy. Later something similar to Euphemius' revolt would give the Lombards a chance for taking Sicily.
 
Actually he deposed the last emperor and then proclaimed himself Rex Italae, and got Zeno's permission to rule it. Also nice username, I see another Dark Ages fan! :p
I was referring about his last years as king while he was fighting Theodoric. He proclaimed himself emperor (and probably did everything he could to piss off his last roman supporters) and this caused some rebellions in the south and in the administration, at the time run by romans.
Regarding my username well i chose it because when i joined the forum this week, I was contemplating the idea of writing a Timeline about Nepos ( I already have some ideas and material) and this influenced my final choice of a name.
 
Thanks for clearing that up. And now returning to the topic: How might a Lombard king, duke or warlord take Sicily from the Byzantines?
 
Thanks for clearing that up. And now returning to the topic: How might a Lombard king, duke or warlord take Sicily from the Byzantines?
Probably with an earlier fall of the exarchate, followed by a strengthening of their hold in southern italy, you could see the lombards trying to develop a fleet ( even the ostrogoths were able to develop a small fleet albeit not as powerful as the roman one) and then during a rebellion , or during a war of the romans with one their neighbor like the arabs or the bulgars, you could see the lombards attempting to take the island. A really good moment would be during the succession between Justiania II, Leontius, Tiberius III and again Justinian II, as the roman empire during this period already lost Africa to the Arabs so it would be the perfect occasion for the lombards to take Ravenna 50 years earlier, thus giving now the lombards time to focus south. However it will still be a tough conquest: it took almost a century for the arabs to take the entire island while Syracuse was one of the most important city, therefore most fortified, in the empire
 
I do not believe the Longobards had either the numbers nor the organization (or ultimately the interest) in conquering Sicily.
The Longobard invasion was successful mostly because it came after the ravages of the long Gothic wars, followed by the Justinian plague which further depopulated Italy. The success was anyway limited, since they were able to conquer the Padan Valley at the beginning, as well as Tuscany, Spoleto and Benevento, but Liguria was much harder and dealing with the Pentapolis took them another couple of centuries almost.
Then there is the problem that they were much more backward than the Goths (who had longer to deal with both the WRE and the ERE and absorb their culture), their basic organization was the fara (an extended clan) which goes far to explain the difficulties of the string of Longobard kings in dealing with their unruly dukes and finally their Arianism was putting them in contrast with the Catholic church and the Catholic population of Italy.
While the southern duchies (Spoleto and Benevento) paid lip service to the king in Pavia, they considered themselves effectively independent (the division between Langobardia major - Padan valley and Tuscany - and Langobardia Minor (Spoleto and Benevento) started immediately, and the string of ERE fortresses and walled cities linking the Exarchate in Ravenna with the Roman Duchy did not help at all. Incidentally, the duchy of Friuli was territorially part of Langobardia major, but it was equally difficult to manage, as were more or less all the other northern duchies: the writ of the king in Pavia could not be enforced easily, even when a strong king got the throne.
The complete lack of naval culture (even before the lack of any kind of navy) would have required for them to get the help of the coastal Italian cities, none of which had the incentive to do so even if the Longobards had thought to ask (which they did not).
It is interesting to note that the duchy of Benevento was quite a powerful entity in its own (and lasted far longer than the Longobard kingdom itself), but even the dukes of Benevento never managed to conquer the coastal cities of Puglia or Campania, even after the ERE effectively abandoned any real attempt to support Naples, Gaeta and the other coastal cities of Campania.
I could swear that the idea of conquering Sicily never crossed the mind of any Longobard ruler, either in Pavia or in Benevento, and this assume that they knew where Sicily was located and why it would have been a worthwhile addiction to the kingdom (which I doubt): the king in Pavia had his own troubles (Exarchate, Pentapolis, Roman Duchy, but also unruly duchies and possible invasions both from the east and the west) which kept him extremely busy and left no time for flights of fancy.
 
Top