AHC/WI: The Normans Conquer Greece in the 1080s?

What would need to happen, and what would be the results, if Robert "Guiscard" Hauteville's invasion of Byzantium succeeded beyond its wildest dreams, and conquered the entirety of mainland Greece?
 
I'm not sure about the causes or the PoD, I'll leave this to another poster, but the consequences will surely be interesting.

The Byzantine Empire at the time was at the lowest of its fortunes. Alexius might not have the strength to resist a possible usurpation, and the Pechenegs were still at large in the Balkans IIRC.

I don't know if it will result in the full collapse of the Byzantine Empire, as I don't believe the Normans will retain their rule for a long time, and without some sheer luck they won't go beyond Thessalonica, much less Constantinople, and an eventual attempt of going north beyond Greece might risk a conflict with the Pechenegs. At the time, their position in Italy itself wasn't that solid. As soon as a Norman ruler (possibly Roger I) turns its back to subjugate Sicily - a more significant strategic concern than Greece - whoever is in charge of the Empire will have the chance to reconquer the region. Depending on the circumstances, it's likely that the local Hellenic and Orthodox population will oppose the Norman domination.

This might butterfly the Norman participation in the 1st Crusade - if, of course, this does not butterflies the Crusade itself - but it's more likely that this hampers the possibility of an early reconquest of Anatolia from the Turks, and their rule will consolidate even as the Seljuk empire fractures after Alp Arslan's death (the Normans themselves probably won't attempt to launch campaigns of conquest against Asia, excepting some raids against coastal cities such as Smyrna, Rhodes, etc.).
 
What would need to happen, and what would be the results, if Robert "Guiscard" Hauteville's invasion of Byzantium succeeded beyond its wildest dreams, and conquered the entirety of mainland Greece?

???
if he has Byzantium, why would he give that up and take Greece?

It's sort of like saying 'If the British had done better in the attack on Washington and conquered Maine'.
 
If the Normans took Greece all the way to Thessalonica, maybe that forces the Byzzies to focus on Anatolia?
 

Deleted member 97083

Or maybe the Sultans of Rum invade, Byzantium collapses, and the empire is split (not necessarily peacefully) between Saracens and Normans?
It seems logistically very difficult for the Normans to take Constantinople, which would require unchallenged dominance of the Aegean and of Thrace.

The Seljuks also didn't have a navy until Alexios Komnenos had already become emperor, and the Sultanate of Rum never actually managed to unite Anatolia--the Ottomans were the first to do so.
 
It seems logistically very difficult for the Normans to take Constantinople, which would require unchallenged dominance of the Aegean and of Thrace.

I see no reason for the Normans to take Constantinople in that scenario. Just Greece is enough. And their warships will certainly be superior to anything the Byzies might have in the Aegean Sea.

I wonder, is this before or after the establishment of the Varangian Guard? If after, this might lead to some interesting events... *hint, hint*
 
I see no reason for the Normans to take Constantinople in that scenario. Just Greece is enough. And their warships will certainly be superior to anything the Byzies might have in the Aegean Sea.

I wonder, is this before or after the establishment of the Varangian Guard? If after, this might lead to some interesting events... *hint, hint*

It's after, Harad Hardrada of Norway who died at Stamford Bridge in 1066, had served in the guard in the 1040's and 50's. I don't know if the Normans could take "Greece" The Byzantines would need major bad luck for that to even happen, as the Normans are caught up in the investiture controversy as allies of the Pope, and Robert had basically lost his fleet to the Venetians.
 

oberdada

Gone Fishin'
What's next? The Normanic-Byzantine-Empire? Come on, that is bit too much, even for AH.com...
 
That's actually not as ASB as one might expect. The Byzzies were naturally interested in Southern Italy for as long as they were able to project power thereX and it's not impossible to think that the Normans could, under the right corcumstances, install themselves as Emperors via a bribe/coup and subsequent conversion to Orthodoxy.
 
I can see Greece/Epirus/Macedonia or parts thereof being conquered by the Normans and set up as Latin fiefdoms in the same manner as the sub-principalities of the Latin Empire, but I think their chances of taking Constantinople itself are slim. They don't have the navy to do it, and they're not going to get it from Venice (who made the 4th Crusade possible) because Venice was at that time siding with the Byzantines against the Normans.
 
Top