Comparing a victorious Byzantine Empire to the Ottomans

[Sarantapechaina]

Does that make it an appandage? I mean, Trebizond wasn't run by state robots in earlier eras.

It does when Ioannes basically appointed Konstantinos (Theodoros' son) because he had no control over the area, from appointments to manpower to resources. Even Alexios basically had to treat Theodoros Gabras as an ally, not a subordinate. Order was only restored when Ioannes launched a full-scale invasion shortly before his death.

Isaac of Cyprus, I presume, not Isaac uncle of Alexius of the Alexiad.

Yup.

 

[Basileus Giorgios]

Agreed on John, as above. Manuel...yeah, seriously. I wouldn't say he was a terrible emperor (an Andronicus II, say), but he managed to leave the state worse off than when he took the throne, despite if not because of those projects of his that did achieve anything in the short term.

And none of the emperors after him in the twenty-four years before the Fourth Crusade was able to make up for that.

I think you're rather harsh on Manuel, there, and judging him with hindsight. If Manuel's a bad Emperor for leaving problems behind that lead to disaster, then so's Justinian, and Heraclius is certainly little more than an unmitigated disaster.

As for the general Komnenid policies and style of rule, I think I agree with Sarantapechaina's main points. The Komnenoi were Anatolian dynasts, as you know, and, in the atmosphere of the 1070s and 1080s they prospered by basically taking over the Empire and running it like an Anatolian feudal estate, by sidelining bureaucrats, and establishing complex marital alliances. Komnenid Emperors were not really the "guardians of the people" that all earlier monarchs had posed as- they were, rather, very competent hijackers who used the Imperial system for their own ends.

 

[Elfwine]

I think you're rather harsh on Manuel, there, and judging him with hindsight. If Manuel's a bad Emperor for leaving problems behind that lead to disaster, then so's Justinian, and Heraclius is certainly little more than an unmitigated disaster.

Manuel left problems that a better emperor (more like his father, say) wouldn't have left in the first place.

Justinian is not that different, and Heraclius is an example of a combination of circumstances, some of which we can't really ask him to have prepared for.

For instance (on Manuel), what was he (Manuel) doing leaving the Seljuks to do whatever in Anatolia for most of his reign? That was careless.

Manuel had too many projects and not enough lasting successes anywhere. At least Justinian can plead that his empire got struck by a plague. Manuel...just couldn't concentrate. He's like the anti-Basil (the Bulgarslayer). Not to say Basil's obsession with crushing Bulgaria was the best of all possible policies, but it at least accomplished that for the long term.

I'm treating the heir situation as beyond Manuel's control - its not his fault in any meaningful way that he couldn't sire a legitimate son until a dozen years before his death. Making a note of that because that lead to one of the really disastrous consequences ("No one after him was able to repair what needed to be repaired.").

As for the general Komnenid policies and style of rule, I think I agree with Sarantapechaina's main points. The Komnenoi were Anatolian dynasts, as you know, and, in the atmosphere of the 1070s and 1080s they prospered by basically taking over the Empire and running it like an Anatolian feudal estate, by sidelining bureaucrats, and establishing complex marital alliances. Komnenid Emperors were not really the "guardians of the people" that all earlier monarchs had posed as- they were, rather, very competent hijackers who used the Imperial system for their own ends.

I think one can go too far with calling that "feudal" however. It seems to be more a matter of...hm, how to put it.

Personal, as opposed to institutional, power. They drew on their supporters and their networks, rather than the bureaucracy every Byzantophile praises as one of the things that made the ERE a state and not a patchwork of princedoms.

This seems more true of Alexius than John (who seems to have had less trust in his family as a loyal base of supporters), Manuel I don't know.

 

[wormyguy]

I think you're rather harsh on Manuel, there, and judging him with hindsight. If Manuel's a bad Emperor for leaving problems behind that lead to disaster, then so's Justinian, and Heraclius is certainly little more than an unmitigated disaster.

Well yes, Justinian is certainly one of the worst emperors. Heraclius can be more forgiven, since most of the problems during and after his reign were not of his own creation.

 

[Elfwine]

Well yes, Justinian is certainly one of the worst emperors. Heraclius can be more forgiven, since most of the problems during and after his reign were not of his own creation.

Why do you put him (Justinian I) in the company of men like Alexius III or Andronicus II?

 

[Sassanid Saxon]

While the Komnenoi certainly did not always do the right thing for the Empire's lesser subjects, they did much better at holding the Empire together than the emperors in the century before them had. "Feudalism" in the Rhomanian context was not as much as a divisive force as it was in say, the HRE at this time. Their re conquests in Anatolia and the Balkans coincideded with an economic and demographic boom in the region that allowed the Empire to regain a similar level to power to that which it had had during the Macedonian dynasty, albeit ALOT richer than the Macedonians had been. The Komnenian Empire did not end up like the Ottomans because of the inability of rulers after John II to focus upon the eastern frontier. An alliance with the crusader states, the rising Kingdom of Georgia and perhaps even the Armenian Cilicians (whom the Rhomanians failed to reach accords with, sadly) would not be unthinkable here. While I doubt that they would ever reconquer Egypt or S. Italy, I can see a ERE focused upon Anatolia surviving a long time. Manuel I's failure to use the resources he inherited to secure the Empire's heartland is all the stranger since it was so avoidable...