I do believe that Manuel having a daughter, and not a son, in 1169 would have confirmed Bela-Alexios as heir at that point. Manuel would have despaired at ever having a son, and by then Bela trumps all other potential suitors for Maria Komnene due to his education in the imperial capital...as well as the potential to seize Hungary as part of his birthright.
Bela-Alexios: Manuel I succeeded by son-in-law.
- Thread starter Megas Doux
- Start date
I do believe that Manuel having a daughter, and not a son, in 1169 would have confirmed Bela-Alexios as heir at that point. Manuel would have despaired at ever having a son, and by then Bela trumps all other potential suitors for Maria Komnene due to his education in the imperial capital...as well as the potential to seize Hungary as part of his birthright.
Indeed, Bela-Alexios had presided over Orthodox church synods in 1166 with Manuel and his betrothed Maria, considering that there also was an Orthodox element in Hungary at this time, Bela would certainly have to convert to Orthodoxy, with a focus upon the "Unionist" attitude of Manuel towards the Papacy.
Another interesting detail; upon marching with an imperial army upon the Hungarian capital, would Bela reign from Constantinople with Manuel in order to seamlessly ascend to the Roman throne at his father-in-laws death? I cant see him ruling from Buda if there is an intention of him being Basileus due to Manuel having no son.
I think the title of Basileus would take the precedence over the title of king of Hungary, therefore he would rule from Constantinople. I wouldn't exclude the possibility of Bela-Alexios continuously travelling along the Danube, in the Balkans and Anatolia (or even Italy if he has a western focus like Manuel) during his military campaigns.
I actually would expect that rather than Buda, you could see Bela ruling from Belgrade, at least whilst he is Kaisar. Its on the edge of Roman and Hungarian territory, can travel to Constantinople and Buda via the Danube equally easily, and is secure from Roman OR Hungarian uprisings.
Plus, as it is closer to the Orthodox areas of Hungary, it allows him to focus on building support in that region, which means he could institute a form of the Theme system in Eastern Hungary.
Constantinople is great, but Belgrade is a good compromise for most circumstances.
But I'd be making sure there was a fortification in downriver Buda to make sure that loyal forces can hold the Hungarian capital and allow a fleet to arrive, supply the fortification and deploy from it to counter-siege any potential rebels.
It could even be called Alexionople, or Sandorvaros locally.
Actually, the Hungarian nobility isn't that big of a problem. During the early Árpáds(, including Béla III), around 2/3↔1/2 of the lands were in royal possession. The Church is a bigger issue, but even that can be solved if the support of the Pope is acquired. This new entity could be a good counterweight against the Staufens in the Pope's eyes, so it isn't that far-fetched idea. I wonder how would this Hungaro-Byzantine Empire interact with the Crusader States. Also later, the Mongol invasion of the Muslim world could prove to be a huge opportunity for expansion, if they're handled well in Cumania beforehand.
Marc
Donor
On the other hand, it would almost certainly bring the Byzantine empire onto the front page of possible Mongols conquests, via from the Northeast. Imagine the Mongols sweeping down the Balkans, reducing Thessaloníki to blood-wet ashes as an example. Arriving before the walls of the City with the best siege train in the world. As plausible as any alternate history starting with this theme's premise.
I don't think the Mongols could deliver any significant punches once Ögedei dies, so they really don't have much time to ravage the Balkans and/or Hungary. Since they probably would have been more cautious with their invasion against TTL's Hungaro-Byzantium, the could have even lost OTL's brief window of opportunity to attack.
The Khans of the Golden Horde were just simply too busy with internal strifes and whatnot, so the earliest date the Mongols(Golden Horde) could launch a significant campaign again would be during Mengu-Timur Khan's reign, but by that point everyone and their moms would have been perfectly prepared for any Mongol actions. OTL's failed invasion of Poland in 1280( and later of Hungary) speaks for itself.
Marc
Donor
"A riper berry is plucked earlier". A wealthy Hungario-Byzantium state is likely much more appealing than hammering on the far poorer Russians (and the Mongols would probably have a fairly good ideas of how rich Constantinople was). 1238-1242 would the crucial period. Instead of sweeping West with multiple armies, first head Southwest.
Last edited:
Let's go through this step by step, keeping butterflies to a minimum.
So Manuel has no son and thus promotes Bela as his successor Alexios.
1) Does the Senate accept Bela-Alexios as Caesar?
2) If so, where does Bela-Alexios set his court as base? Presumably in the Balkans to maximise his Hungarian connections?
So Manuel has no son and thus promotes Bela as his successor Alexios.
1) Does the Senate accept Bela-Alexios as Caesar?
2) If so, where does Bela-Alexios set his court as base? Presumably in the Balkans to maximise his Hungarian connections?
1) Why not? Who are the other contenders?
2) I'll refer back to what I said a while back.
If Bela-Alexios wants to keep the Romans on side, it HAS to be Constantinople, but for Hungary, I think that via the Danube he can project his authority quite well. The vital thing is ensuring he has a good representative or some type of Viceroy in Belgrade, especially if he's managed to make Belgrade be seen as the current ruling seat whilst in charge.
The big benefit is that whilst Bela IS King, and IS Kaiser, he can lay the groundwork for his future rule, which has to focus on the control of the Danube so that no rebel force can reasonably take it from him. This means fortifications designed to be used and protect the river.
Marc
Donor
Who are the other contenders?
For starters:
Andronikos Komnenos and/or his sons John and Manuel Komnenos.
Andronikos Doukas Angelos.
John Doukas.
The list goes on. Point being that if the dyantoi don't want a barbarian on the throne, there are more than a few alternate candidates among their crowd.
Never underestimate cultural snobbery as a factor in politics..
For starters:
Andronikos Komnenos and/or his sons John and Manuel Komnenos.
Andronikos Doukas Angelos.
John Doukas.
The list goes on. Point being that if the dyantoi don't want a barbarian on the throne, there are more than a few alternate candidates among their crowd.
Never underestimate cultural snobbery as a factor in politics..
Last edited:
I agree,but I highly doubt that even the Mongols can break through Constantinople—unless they have a navy.All foreign attempts at capturing Constantinople failed without the use of a navy.
Last edited:
Deleted member 67076
Historically the Byzantines had no problem paying the Mongols off. Which they did all throughout the 1200s and into the early 1300s.
I'd rather start re-writing it. I'm thirty-five now, I was twenty then, I have a much better knowledge of history. Should I do it in this thread or start its own? I am new here...
That's completely true, but I'm not at all convinced that the Byzantines would be unable to win tactical victories against the Mongols, particularly if they had a large available supply of light steppe horsemen to integrate into their own formations. Remember that the Hungarians were comfortably holding the Mongols off on good terrain until the moment when they were flanked. The Hungarians had not forgotten their own origins and had some idea of how to fight a plains army. People forget it took twenty years of campaigning for the Mongols to conquer the Southern Song, who were several thousand miles closer to the Mongol homeland.