Welcome abroad! Cool username 
I believe IOTL stands for 'in our time-line' and ITTL 'in this time-line'. I'm still not 100% sure
I believe IOTL stands for 'in our time-line' and ITTL 'in this time-line'. I'm still not 100% sure
Isaac's Empire 2.0
- Thread starter Basileus Giorgios
- Start date
The Kartophylax (ByzantineCaesar) has answered your questions, so I can say (as someone who has read the original) that the Scandinavian lands definitely come up.
Sufficient to say, where do you think Johannia as the name in this timeline for America came from?
This humble senator (me) also suggests you read the other timeline (The Eagle of the Bosporus) linked in my signature and comment. Not that I can say it compares to the Basileus's work, but I hope it is worth a read anyway.
Last edited:
Welcome to the boards!
I'm sure something interesting will happen in Scandinavia in the new version - in the original, it was not very well expanded upon, but I think the presence of myself and Makemakean (we are both Swedish) will change this as regards the new version.
Thanks for the Info guys, a lot of what I've read on these boards now makes more sense. Can't wait for the next installment.
Thanks!
Thank you very much. There certainly seems to be a lot of demand for more Scandinavian action in 2.0, so let me assure you you'll get it... eventually. It'll take time, though. Hang on!
Cheers, I'll try not to disappoint.
Chairete, o paides! The Megas Dux has just returned from a pleasing stay at his villa on the isle of (in 6566 EK, Saracen-dominated) Melite so has missed much of the conversation...
Very nicely done, BG. All I would add is that the children of the Turkish nomads and Christian women would come to be known as (IOTL) 'Turkopouloi', with the surname Turkopoulos particularly common among this group, and would no doubt form a kind of separate corps who would probably be an important element in the imperial armies during the Komnenid era (especially because their fathers would train them in the fine arts of horse archery)...
Happy to oblige. The name is Greek; the first name in particular has the approximate meaning of the 'burnt [one]'.
I agree. Lovely map, Ares96 - but with one small error. On fair Cypria, rich in copper, the capital is Lefkosia (the ancient Greek name) not 'Nicosia', which dates from the French and Italian domination of the island IOTL...
Very nicely done, BG. All I would add is that the children of the Turkish nomads and Christian women would come to be known as (IOTL) 'Turkopouloi', with the surname Turkopoulos particularly common among this group, and would no doubt form a kind of separate corps who would probably be an important element in the imperial armies during the Komnenid era (especially because their fathers would train them in the fine arts of horse archery)...
Happy to oblige. The name is Greek; the first name in particular has the approximate meaning of the 'burnt [one]'.
That map is really, really lovely. I have Inkscape but I'm not at that level yet
I agree. Lovely map, Ares96 - but with one small error. On fair Cypria, rich in copper, the capital is Lefkosia (the ancient Greek name) not 'Nicosia', which dates from the French and Italian domination of the island IOTL...
Last edited:
Well, they can't really be called Saracens in the strictest meaning, now can they? After all, they are true to the word of Christ (the heresy preached by that fiend Ratzinger, but still better than the heathenism of Mohammed), and their language is far from the same as the one spoken by the Saracens themselves.
I agree. Lovely map, Ares96 - but with one small error. On fair Cypria, rich in copper, the capital is Lefkosia (the ancient Greek name) not 'Nicosia', which dates from the French and Italian domination of the island IOTL...
I see. I suppose the wicked Frankish heresies have warped my Scandian mind...
Pay attention, o pais! I said in 6566 E.K., which your own map shows Melite as occupied by the confederates of Muslim Sicily...
Aye. I would say so. But we live and learn, no?
Pay attention, o pais! I said in 6566 E.K., which your own map shows Melite as occupied by the confederates of Muslim Sicily...
Of course; my command of AM years is still not the best.
Aye. I would say so. But we live and learn, no?
Indeed.
Chapter Three
Chapter Three: Education for an Emperor
"Two things in particular contribute to the hegemony of the Romans, namely, our system of honours and our wealth, to which one might add a third: the wise control of the other two, and prudence in their distribution": Michael Psellos, Chronographia
"Two things in particular contribute to the hegemony of the Romans, namely, our system of honours and our wealth, to which one might add a third: the wise control of the other two, and prudence in their distribution": Michael Psellos, Chronographia
Isaac Komnenos felt death’s approach early. At the end of April 1075, he abdicated the throne, and joined his daughter Maria in monastic confinement (i), and died a few weeks later. He was sixty four years old.
Initially, Isaac’s plans for the succession ran smoothly. His nephew Alexios’ marriage had quickly proved to be a fruitful one, with the birth of a daughter, Anna (ii), to the Empress Euphemia at the end of the year. The new Emperor was intelligent and very well read, as a pupil of his new father-in-law Michael Psellos, who, of course, sat on the throne alongside him as Michael VII. But this pupil-master role did not easily adjust itself to the new roles that Alexios and Psellos found themselves in. A year after Isaac’s death, it was noted, Alexios was already being pushed into the background.
In part, this was inevitable. Michael VII, as we should perhaps now call him, had been at court in Constantinople for the better part of half a century (iii), whilst Alexios was still yet to reach his twentieth birthday. Alexios’ whole life had been spent under the shadow of Michael as his tutor, and it was inevitable that Michael’s influence should continue now they shared the reigns of Government. Ever since his arrival in the City, Michael Psellos had criticised and sniped at the workings of the Imperial court (iv). Now, as Emperor, he finally had the opportunity to do something about them.
He began, in the spring of 1076, by starting to systematically strip various members of the court of their titles and pensions, ostensibly to restore the dignity of the Imperial office and court. The Emperor’s motives seem to have been genuine (v) - but his policies immediately sprung up a whole wave of resentment, especially following the birth of a grandson, Michael Komnenos, in the autumn of that year. Little Michael was almost immediately associated with his father and grandfather in the purple (vi), and showered with a whole host of titles.
The foreign policy situation was also beginning to look shaky. One of the Emperor Isaac’s last acts in office had been to make a guarantee of his support to Pope Gregory VII in his growing dispute with the Western Emperor Henry IV (vii), in exchange for his recognition as the one True Emperor. For Isaac, it had been a sensible act of realpolitik in dealing with the Normans and his Latin subjects in Apulia, but the real consequences of the policy only came to light in the opening months of Michael’s reign, with the details of Gregory’s so called Dictatus Papae filtering through to Constantinople. This, which included fragments openly asserting Papal superiority over the whole Church, as well as his temporal power in Italy (viii), provoked a storm of outrage in Constantinople, which eventually compelled Michael to dismiss the Patriarch, John VIII, and replace him with his own nominee, John IX “Italos” (ix). The Papal alliance was a firm plank of Michael VIII’s foreign policy, but by the end of 1076, it was beginning to cause more problems than it was worth.
Over Christmas of 1076, a plague descended on Constantinople, and was caught by both the Emperor Alexios and the Domestikos tēs Dyseōs, Michael’s ally Constantine Doukas. Doukas, a man in his early seventies, swiftly perished, leaving the position of the Empire’s most senior Western commander vacant. Alexios, from his sickbed, spoke vaguely of a desire to elevate his brother the Katepánō Isaac to the position, but Michael was swiftly able to dissuade his son-in-law. Isaac was popular, successful, and, most threateningly to the prospects of Michael’s two grandchildren, a Komnenid. He feared, with good reason, that if Alexios died, Isaac would easily be able to sweep in, and remove all of Psellos’ family from the Palace. To this end, therefore, the Emperor held his nose, and, early in 1077, proclaimed the aristocratic general Nikēphoros Bryennios (x) as Doukas’ successor. Isaac was left out in the cold.
As it turned out, it had all been for nothing. Alexios made a strong recovery, so much so that by the late spring, he was with difficulty restrained by his father-in-law from going out on campaign with Byrennios against the Serbs (xi). All that Michael VIII had done, it turned out, had been to fatally weaken the balance with which he held onto his throne. Alexios, aided by the Patriarch, had begun to grow tired of Michael’s overbearing ways and patronising tone (xii). Inch by inch, Michael began to find himself pushed out of the picture by his determined young son-in-law.
Alexius was not Michael’s only worry. In the autumn of 1077, news reached Constantinople that the Normans had mounted a dramatic counteroffensive back into Apulia, and had met with only the scantiest resistance from Isaac Komnenos, who had holed himself up at Barion (xiii). Michael had reassured the anxious mob of Constantinople that the deteriorating weather conditions would prevent a Norman crossing over to Epirus, but he was swiftly proved wrong, when a Norman raiding party captured Dyracchion in a surprise attack. From there, they fanned out across the unprepared winter land, and, in January 1078 (xiv), they marched on Thessaloniki.
The response from Alexios and his allies, led by his formidable mother Anna Dalassēnē, proved to be rapid and harsh. Michael was seized while writing, and compelled at sword point by an ally of Alexios, George Palaiologos (xv), to renounce all claims to the Imperial throne and retire to a monastery. Alexios, meanwhile, summoned troops from the Armenian front, and prepared to stake his future in a confrontation against the Normans. In April, the great force set out, with Alexius at its head, leading some 25,000 troops.
Unsurprisingly, the Normans collapsed before the Emperor’s onslaught. Their supply lines were overextended, and, when the general Nikēphoros Bryennios captured the city of Ochrida (xvi), they found themselves cut off from any hope of retreat to the coast. The Emperor, after defeating them in a couple of minor skirmishes, offered terms, chiefly concerned with settling Norman warriors along the Euphrates front, and in rebellious Serbia. The threat, for now, was at an end.
Alexios could not afford to retreat to Constantinople for now, however. Events in Italy demanded his attention. Accordingly, he left the capital’s administration in the hands of his infant son Michael, though, in practise, Anna Dalassēnē was in charge of the whole operation (xvii). He crossed to Barion, and, there, extracted a humiliating oath of personal loyalty from his doubtless fuming brother. For young Alexios, bullied and patronised for the past three years, it must have been a sweet triumph.
The Italian expedition provided an opportunity for Alexios to assert his authority in other ways. While in Barion, messengers arrived from the Pope of Rome, inviting Alexios to come as a supplicant to the Eternal City, to be recognised as a “True Emperor” by the Pope. Pope Gregory must have intended to stamp his recent ecclesiastical triumph over the Western Emperor Henry (xviii) by recognising Alexios, but the letter was seen as a dire insult by Alexios, implying, as it did, that the status of Roman Emperor was for the Pope, and the Pope alone to bestow. Further letters arrived, describing Alexios, insultingly, as being merely a “Greek King” (xix), and proposing an enhanced role for the Papacy in Constantinopolitan court matters. The Imperial court was left fuming with rage at the barefaced cheek of Gregory.
Fortunately, an alternative soon arrived. The Emperor Henry may have bowed the knee to Pope Gregory, but he was far from beaten, and already was plotting his revenge. To Alexios, he proposed a deal. Alexios would provide him with money and troops to crush his rebellious barons (xx), and, in exchange, he would surrender all claims of sovereignty over the important city of Ravenna (xxi). Most importantly, both would unite to enforce the claims of the “indivisible Roman Empire” against Pope Gregory. Alexios immediately seized the deal with open arms.
It was not, on the face of it, an especially good bargain. Ravenna was gained, but it quickly became an expensive outpost to defend, and its citizenry was none too happy with being subdued to Constantinople and her rapacious tax collectors. Pope Gregory immediately opened church funds to the Normans, who, by 1079, were once more running amok in Apulia. More seriously, he incited a major rebellion in the client state of Croatia. Alexios personally took command of the Croatian war effort, but it took until the end of 1081 for him to restore even the appearance of order. The treasury had been stripped bare, for minimal gains. Alexios had discovered the hard way that Pope Gregory had to be treated with respect.
In 1082, Imperial ambassadors made their way to Rome, and, humiliatingly, asked for a renewal of the alliance. Gregory, delighted with this turn of events, gladly accepted, and, seeing no need to be needlessly provocative, addressed a series of adoring letters to the “Most August Emperor of the Romans, Alexius”. It was, nonetheless, a serious climb-down for the Emperor. He had been on the throne for seven years, and in that time, had achieved little. Alexios had the seeds of greatness in him but he still had plenty of lessons to learn. Only now would he begin to unleash his true potential. The Roman Empire was about to strike back.
____________________________________________________
i. It was fairly standard practise for Emperors to retreat to monastic exclusion at the very end of their lives, to wash away their sins. As for Isaac joining his daughter, mixed sex monasteries were very rare in the eleventh century, but it was quite common to have monks and nuns sharing buildings and land, in theoretically separate institutions.
ii. This is not OTL's Anna Komnena, but she's named for her formidable grandmother nonetheless.
iii. Psellos had come to court towards the end of the reign of Michael IV (1034-1041), when he was around the age of twenty.
iv. He was no republican, he just envisaged the ideal state of the Empire as being a Platonic land ruled by the theoretical "Philosopher-King", and felt that no Emperor had lived up to this ideal. Becoming that Philosopher-King himself is a bit of a wet dream scenario for Psellos.
v. This sort of behaviour is based on Psellos' OTL criticisms of the behaviour of Constantine IX and X in office, doling out titles.
vi. Very common practise- Constantine V, in particular, had been famous for being associated with his father Leo III on the throne as a baby.
vii. OTL's investiture controversy. Even after 1054, Byzantine-Papal alliances didn't seem implausible, as the schism was widely thought to have been a temporary thing. This only changed IOTL after about 1100.
viii. This is OTL as well.
ix. IOTL, Italos was a heretic who caused some problems for Alexios Komnenos. Here, as Patriarch, he's going to prove himself an even bigger headache, in due course. For now, though, he's someone Michael VII can rely on not to rock the boat when it comes to the Papal alliance.
x. A bit of a court rival of Psellos, Byrennios had been an ally of Romanos Diogenes. Nonetheless, he's a better bet than the threatening figure of Isaac Komnenos the Younger.
xi. Nominally Imperial subjects, in practise, the Serbian princes were entirely autonomous, and paid only lip service to Byzantine overlordship.
xii. Emperor and Patriarch had both studied under Psellos, and they thus share some common grievances at his style.
xiii. For good reason, as you'll see, the sources ITTL don't really state why Isaac was so inactive here. It doesn't seem unlikely that he wanted to politically damage his brother.
xiv. An audacious attempt, but the Normans are masters of warfare, and, I think, if anyone can mount an attack in a Balkan winter, it's them. The Byzantines are certainly caught unprepared.
xv. An OTL figure, from a hitherto minor family, who have been raised to sudden prominence after Claudiopolis.
xvi. A former capital of Bulgaria, Ochrid was one of the largest cities of the Byzantine Balkans in the eleventh century.
xvii. Because, obviously, a male baby is more capable than a political woman at looking after Christendom's largest city.
xviii. This is OTL's Canossa. The Investiture Controversy, up until this point, has worked as OTL. From now, things are about to start to change.
xix. Pretty much the ultimate insult.
xx. Who are, of course, the main problem for a Holy Roman Emperor, far more so than in centralised Byzantium.
xxi. The Byzantines tended to request Ravenna in negotiations with Western Emperors.
Alexius beginning to come into his greatness. Out of the shadow of his father and step-father/mentor.
There'll be a lot of twists and turns, that's for sure!
Indeed. IOTL, it took the better part of a decade for Alexios to properly get to grips with running an Empire- and I see no reason why this shouldn't be the case ITTL, especially as he's starting even younger than he did IOTL.
Excellent update, as usual. Although I was hoping to see the papacy put in its place but this is more realistic.
While reading about the Norman incursion, I realized that with your POD Robert Guiscard should still exist. Do you have any plans for the Weasel?
While reading about the Norman incursion, I realized that with your POD Robert Guiscard should still exist. Do you have any plans for the Weasel?