Byzantium survives Manzikert and wars with Seljuks, what next?

I've been playing a lot of CK2 lately and begin wondering about the first step that the RL Empire would take after the stated wars. The premise is at least that they would pull off a white peace, exiting the conflict unscathed.

1) Revenge against the Normans and reconquest of Southern Italy. (How important was that region to them at all ?)

2) Concentrating its efforts on Duklja and Croatia. (The risk of pissing off HRE by getting a direct border in Carinthia/Slovenia, is it worth it?)

3) Military conflicts with Cumans, Hungarians or basically anyone that controls Wallachia and Moldavia to push them further from the Danube?

4) Simple decades long tense relations with muslim states, concentrating on wars with them and reclaiming little by little what is possible in the Middle East/Levant?
 
In order to have a "white peace," the emperor who was defeated (Romanus something-or-other--Diogenes?) needs to stay in power, since Alp Arslan's terms were fairly lenient. Apparently he collected the survivors and tried to reclaim power, but was defeated by the guy whose backstab caused the defeat in the first place and blinded.

Then said traitor misgoverned and caused a civil war, which led to the Turkic infiltration of Anatolia proper.

However, if Romanus is able to defeat the traitor Ducas and reclaim power, he might not be in power long--although he'd defeated the Seljuks before, Manzikert was such a massive whupping that he'd be in a weakened position.

The Byzantines might not go to war for awhile.
 
Yes I know the circumstances and difficulty that the said state was in after the described situation, but I'm asking more about what would be the Empire's first step of expansion after they could stand on their two own feet again.
 
In Isaac's Empire, I have a focus on Italy that's followed up by overstretch in Hungary and Syria-Palestine in the period 1050-1200. There are other possibilities, of course, but I think that these are probably some of the more likely things to happen.
 
I agree with BG here. I don't know if the area the Empire never really held (Hungary and the north side of the Danube) are worth annexing, but the Empire is going to be drawn into conflict with them anyway, just by rivalry over the Balkans and the fact that the Byzantine interests in the state of the Danubean frontier require making the other guys know not to mess with the Empire.
 
Looking at the Empire in 1071 I think that had Manzikert gone differently - maybe enough to ward off the Turkish entry into Anatolia - then the Empire has to prioritize. First there need to be internal reforms and shoring up both for the government and treasury. Romanos has to defeat the Duokas Family and hold on to Anatolia. The civil war following Manzikert seems to have been the real crux in the fall of Anatolia, so avoiding that is going to be the key. With Romanos alive and Michael VII still in place to take the throne, the stability of the Empire can be maintained. Maybe it could be arranged for Michael VII to retire as he did in OTL and still get Alexius I to the throne, but either way there *has* to be an effective government in Constantinople otherwise little changes. A stable government holding onto Anatolia, Armenia, and the Balkans will look at a few key territories first -

(a) Southern Italy/Sicily
(b) the Levant/Holy Lands
(c) Caucasus Mountains - Georgia, Azerbaijan, Dagestan
(d) Upper Balkans/Venice
(e) less likely Wallachia
(f) less likely modern Tunisia

That is also likely the order they will look to for conquest. If the Byzantines can retake the first two then Egypt will be targeted. I could see the Byzantines taking Venice and southern Italy then trying to move for the eastern Papal States to connect their territory by land, if this occurs reunification of Italy will be a strategic goal.

Most likely I think *if* you avoid Manzikert and get a stable pair or triad of strong emperors then they retake southern Italy/Sicily, Tunisia as it is Norman at the time, the Caucasus region where they already had loyalties and signifciant headway, and the Holy Land (the latter some time following the death of Alp Arslan in 1072). The upper Balkans would be within reach, as would Egypt, though I think Venice and Alexandria will remain Byzantine only in the dreams of those Emperors. This does not guarantee the stability or premanency of the conquests they actually do take. Waiting until 1084 when Venice gets its fleet smashed against the Normans would allow Byzantium to try to exert control over both, and if Venice is to become Byzantine that is the singular best chance. Egypt is still under firm command of the Ayyubid dynasty and Byzantine control here would require luck and skill.

The bigger question is what happens to the rest of Europe if Bzyantium wins at Manzikert. With a stable Empire eyeing or taking the Holy Land there is no First Crusade. With no First Crusade many of the seeds for Europe's revivial in the 12th century, the trade links that revitalize the economy, and the removal of so many warlords and their progeny do not occur. Europe will likely see more internacine warfare. More interestingly it will lead to a problem in the Papal States as Urban II has to contend with several opponents and can not rally the Crusade as proof that Christendom follows him. I doubt he turns to Constantinople for help, but if the Empire is still powerful and perhaps expanding in 1090, who knows.
 
This would also spell an early end for Fatimid Egypt, since that was Alp Arslan's main goal, Anatolia being just a sideshow. That in itself would have consequences all over the Mediterranean.
 
Top