AHC/WI: a Byzantine Pretender Proclaimed Emperor in the West

What would it take for an ambitious general (Belisarius? Heraclius?) To take control of byzantine Italy- the Exarchate plus Sicily, Venice, Dalmatia and maybe Africa?

Would this limit the general collapse of the empire's Balkan frontier once the Eastern emperor gives up on reconquest.

Given Italys problems after rather Gothic wars the big problem seems to be- why stay in italy? Any would be pretender would like heraclius view the west as merely a stepping stone to usurp Constantinople. Now this isn't necessarily impossible to overcome- I can think of two specific individuals- Belisarius or Narses defecting at the start of the Gothic Wars (which would presumably avert much of the devastation and thus help a potential Western restoration in Africa, Illyria, Iberia etc) or perhaps Heraclius or someone like him could set up shop in the west after Constantinople falls to the Persians.
 
The bigger problem is - you do not simply create a Western Emperor for some random reason. In order to do so, you need to create the right conditions - the easiest is to have an even more successful Byzantine Empire (and thus enough viable, uncontested lands to actually base a new State on) or otherwise, create a huge enough divide for an ambitious young man to exploit. But the problem is, the man who worked to give the Byzantines enough land for such a POD to work also based his reconquest on the existence of a single Roman Empire, further cementing it against division.
That's why your suggested PODs don't really fly - neither man really had the landbase or motivation to carve a separate State, but would rather have laid a claim to the Imperial throne itself (as happened with Heraclius).

My suggested POD are a better/faster consolidation of Italy coupled with no plague of Justinian; this allows the Empire to keep Italy and maybe launch some serious effort at retaking Spain, at which point there is enough distance from Constantinople and landmass to eventually encourage some ambitious young man to detach himself from Constantinople. Or, if you want an Empire closer to your suggestion, simply have no Longobard invasion of Italy with history staying mostly the same as OTL; Byzantium may still well lose much to the assaults of the Arabs, and if there is a rich enough (but not central, as no Emperor saw it as central) Italy, when Iconoclasm comes, somebody may attempt to crown himself Emperor and protector of the Pope and the Empire from heretics & infidels, but fail to take Constantinople and be forced to remain just the holder of everything west of Illyria with neither part having enough strength to oust the other.
 
Agrred, the major issue is that there isn't enough Byzantine territory in the west at the time of a religious divide. By the time of the iconoclastic controversy Byzantine Africa and Sicily had largely fallen and the Exarchate was reduced to a few coastal holdings in Apulia and Romagna. I don't think you even need Spain- Africa plus Sicily is a good enough powebase on its own, and if the Empire can keep the Exarchate on top of that and possibly reconquer the north....

Perhaps one could even go later, with a longer lasting Macedon dynasty subduing all of Sicily plus Africa then proclaiming themselves emperor during the chaos of the Turkish invasions and Investiture controversy and seizing Rome?
 
Top