The Seljuk Turks took Anatolia after the Battle of Manzikert and it was partially recovered by the Komnenoi. This recovery stagnated after the Komnenoi were deposed. Let's say a new emperor comes along in the 1200's and retakes Anatolia. In this POD the Venetians fail in taking Constantinople and the Byzantines are very angry and rally behind a new leader who deposes the Angeloi. How would the re-integration work? How much of Anatolia was Turkish? When did Anatolia start losing its Greek and Orthodox identity?
 
The Seljuk Turks took Anatolia after the Battle of Manzikert and it was partially recovered by the Komnenoi. This recovery stagnated after the Komnenoi were deposed. Let's say a new emperor comes along in the 1200's and retakes Anatolia. In this POD the Venetians fail in taking Constantinople and the Byzantines are very angry and rally behind a new leader who deposes the Angeloi. How would the re-integration work? How much of Anatolia was Turkish? When did Anatolia start losing its Greek and Orthodox identity?

I think it'd be Okay, actually, at the date you have chosen. Most of the region was still Greek. The Turkish presence was mainly in the region near Ankara, Iconium, and the Halys river, in central Anatolia. The north and south coasts and the western third of Anatolia were still Byzantine. Central Anatolian plateau was Turkish, although some Greeks probably still existed. For instance at Lake Pousgous we know there were Greeks in the 1130s, although they preferred to fight for the Seljuks against the emperor John II Komnenos (interestingly!). Eastern Anatolia would have been a complete mix of Greeks, Turks and Armenians, under Turkish rule.

As I understand it, Anatolia as a whole only really shifted to becoming majority Turkish in the 14th century or later. But a more specific answer does depend on which area exactly, as Anatolia is a big place. Some areas remained majority Greek until as late as the 1920s.

Also, one interesting detail I learned about the emperor Manuel I Komnenos (1143-1180). In his time, the Seljuk court and the Byzantine society saw a lot of mixing between Turks and Greeks, and they were found in both territories. Some Greek nobles became Seljuks, and some Turks joined the imperial army and even joined the imperial household and became 'Greek'. In this context, the emperor attempted to introduce a reform to the conversion process from Islam to Christianity, to make it easier for Turks to convert to Christianity. Specifically, he wanted to remove the part where they were required to "reject" the god that they believed in before.

Now, from a theological perspective, as I understand it the three Abrahamic religions Islam, Christianity and Judaism already worship the same god, so the process of "rejecting" the god of Islam doesn't really make much sense any way, since it is the same god the Christians believe in. But anyway, Manuel's proposal would have made it easier to convert, because Muslims wouldn't be required to say they "reject" god they believe in, instead they'd just accept that Christianity is the "true" way to reach that god and accept that they were misguided before. Which is a lot easier than requiring someone to actually "reject" the god they believe in entirely.

So as you might have guessed, I think Manuel's idea was great and would have been a very positive step for Byzantium. Unfortunately however, I understand that hardline Orthodox clergy rejected the proposal, and it was never implemented. In my personal opinion, these narrow-minded clerics and their prejudice were an obstacle that should have been overruled. Had the change been introduced, and combined with more successful Byzantine campaigns in the Anatolian plateau, one can well imagine that the capture of Konya (for instance) might well have resulted in the restoration of Byzantine rule over the interior, followed by absorption of the Turkish population and assimilation. After a few generations, it would be as though Manzikert never happened.

Edit - also @CalBear could we get this thread moved to the pre-1900 section? I believe the OP posted a thread where he asked how he could do this. Thanks!
 
IIRC either Treadgold or Vyronis (author of The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor) stated that at the time of the Fourth Crusade the Greeks would have just barely been the predominant population in the Turkish-controlled areas of Anatolia. They would certainly have formed a majority on the peninsula as a whole.
 
IIRC either Treadgold or Vyronis (author of The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor) stated that at the time of the Fourth Crusade the Greeks would have just barely been the predominant population in the Turkish-controlled areas of Anatolia. They would certainly have formed a majority on the peninsula as a whole.
I think that the early Ottoman army was made of Greeks and Armenians who converted to Islam. In fact many modern Greeks and Turks are pretty close to each other genetically speaking sharing many haplogroups with each other. I think Umayad Spain was like this for most of its existence with a large portion of its population being made up of native Christian and converted Iberian peoples. So if a Roman Reconquista occurs and they try to Hellenize Anatolia like they did with the Isaurians in the 7th century how would this work out? Would they rapidly start to assimilate with some Turkish noble houses being Greek? John Auxos for example was Turkish and a close friend of John II Komnenos whose Romanized family held positions in the Imperial Court. Would it be like how the Lombards were latinzed thanks to close proximity with the native Latin Italian population who were more numerous and much more established?
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
Assimilative process by the Byzantines to absorb the Turks would be interesting. We could see them like the Bulgarians and Hungarians. Hungarian model of the Byzantine Empire is super interesting.
 
I think the aftermath of the Spanish Reconquista would be a good analogy for what to expect in that scenario, at least in terms of religious policies. Given a) that the Greek population was still significant in Central Anatolia and that many Turks would be driven away or killed upon reconquest, and b) that Anatolia would presumably remain under Greek control for several centuries after that, I think we'd see Turkish reduced to small pockets at best by modern times.
 
I think the aftermath of the Spanish Reconquista would be a good analogy for what to expect in that scenario, at least in terms of religious policies. Given a) that the Greek population was still significant in Central Anatolia and that many Turks would be driven away or killed upon reconquest, and b) that Anatolia would presumably remain under Greek control for several centuries after that, I think we'd see Turkish reduced to small pockets at best by modern times.
Well the Andalusian peoples of Granada assimilated rapidly into Spanish society. So maybe in this world where the Fourth Crusade fails is likely to experience a wave of anger and a sort of proto nationalist feeling. Perhaps the next Basileus will try to secure his position by conquering Bulgaria and Anatolia to establish his dynasty as the next Macedonians. Maybe this might be a Second Komnenoi restoration with Alexios the great grandson of Andronikos being alive in Trebizond. Perhaps he manages to present himself as the true against the Angeloi who were corrupt and saw the loss of Bulgaria and were about to let the second Rome fall to the barbarians from the West. If this Alexios has the military capabilities of his ancestors (Alexios: who fought the Turks since he was 12 and John and Manuel who were brilliant generals) he repels the Latins and those he captured are released to the mob who tear them apart. They'd probably expel the Latins from the city as well. Perhaps he pulls a Tzimiskes and retakes the Byzantine de-jure land. Though to pay for his army he might re work the Pronoia system into that empowers the aristocracy less and is a way to pay for the army like a reformed thematic system seeing how the aristocracy that his family raised to prominence rose up and murdered his grandfather, blinded his father, and forced him and his brother David to flee. He might also revive the Macedonian laws and give out posts to lowborn soldiers and administrators to build a new power base around the middle and lower class against the aristocracy. Since some of Constantinople was damaged during the initial assault Alexios has to take steps to rebuild it. Though with new public works sponsored by the legitimate emperor who saved the city from barbarians the Komnenos dynasty will gain more prestige and will likely be seen in the same light as the Macedonians were. After all a mod dragged Theodora from a monastery and forcefully crowned and dressed her in imperial robes when she turned a deaf ear to them clamoring for her to be the Basilissa. I expect that the pope might be wary about further crusades since their regional "ally" who could grant them safe passage into the east is now very angry at them.
 
Top