Island Roman Empire

Eastern Roman Empire abandons Constantinople in 600s.
Greek islands, Cyprus, Malta, Sicily/Sardinia/Corsica, Balearics, etc, are the centers of power. Constantinople's golden horn is only point of presence for control of the straits. The empire is purely a naval empire with ports held for local sea control.
The emperial intelligence, trade, diplomatic, and financial strengths are used only for naval control.
The Persians, Egyptians, Slavs, Lombards, Visigoths, Ostrogoths, Vandals, etc, are played off against each other to maintain sea control by the empire. Empires rise and fall as the armies march along the shore. Mercenaries are hired where necessary, and the island militias back up the naval forces to repel invasions.
 
Could Mediterranean islands support the population necessary for the control over an Empire in the face of say mainland Italy of Egypt? Being significantly outnumbered makes for a small 'empire'.

Also, why would they abandon Constantinople in the 600's, defeat against the Sassanids?
 

NapoleonXIV

Banned
Didn't Athens follow this strategy in the Classical Age?

Sardinia, Sicily etc aren't really "islands" as much as little Continents, like England. Whole cultures can grow up and die there and never know they're on land surrounded by water.

It's difficult to see though, how any Empire could become powerful enough to hold all that strategic territory and not acquire some mainland possessions, particularly in Greece, where the strategic importance of many mainland cities to the offshore islands is often a primary consideration to both.

And how could you hold Constantinople and NOT trade in it? "Sorry, that rich Caravan....take it a hundred miles or so down the coast where's there's no place to land and its much more difficult to protect, we only keep a military presence here, though since we've nothing to watch over, God knows why":rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Well, it's a port, the ships come in, you can trade. It's just not a manufacturing town because then you would need to defend a wider area, and need to feed the troops, so you need a farming population, and the farm area needs to be defended, etc.
Just keep the Golden Horn tower and demolish the rest. Build a causeway or some docks or something after the city is depopulated.
Refuse to do any territorial control on the mainland. Let the land empires tie up their resources in armies and castles. Stick to a navy.
A Roman Venice, or early Venice. They did fine till they got sucked into owning land nearby.
 

NapoleonXIV

Banned
AFAIK Constantinople was mainly a trading city anyway. (And Byzantium was a substantial naval power) But wasn't that the way with any large city back then? Manufactured things were made by cottage industry, in the countryside or villages and brought to the big cities for assembly into caravans and/or ships for trade to more distant areas. Also, where's the advantage in not allowing certain businesses to practice. You don't need land to feed soldiers, you need money to buy food.

I do see your point though, but then there's another question. Why would Byzantium want most of those areas? Sicily, Sardinia, Corsica are big, difficult to defend and actually primitive compared to the Greek islands. More importantly, they're part of a whole different culture. Even with abandoning Byzantium you're talking about an expansion to more than twice what they normally were, just a few extra troops from the big city aren't going to accomplish that much.
 
With an empire spread across the Mediterranean and fragmented because its mostly islands I would suspect that within a generation or two it would split apart. Each island will develop, unless they are in really close proximity to another, its own society and economy after a while.
 
Another major problem with this whole idea is-what will you build your ships out of?
Just living off the small Greek islands they could use up all their wood after a few generations (as several European nations did in later years i.e. Portugal, Denmark)
 
Purely insular goes too far, but there was a possibility in the 7th-8th century of a Byzantium with a more western and maritime orientation.

Iconoclasty, IIRC was largely favored by the inland Anatolian themes from which the army was drawn, and Leo the Isaurian supported it largely for that reason. (He may personally have favored it as well - the role of cynical expediency in history is sometimes overstated!) It was unpopular in Constantinople itself, in Greece, and especially in the West. Much of Byzantine Italy broke away in 727, and its position there was permanently weakened.

Suppose things go the other way? Most of Anatolia will probably be lost and Islamicized - note, though, that the population likely will come eventually regard themselves as Arabs, even if they come under Turkish rule a few centuries later.

However, the Byzantine position in the West will be preserved. Later in the 8th century they can perhaps defend Italian interests against the Franks, while without the Iconoclasty issue it will be easier for them to retain influence over the papacy. With a greater focus on the Mediterranean they are more likely to prevent the period of Muslim maritime dominance in the 8th and 9th centuries.

The rapid growth of the West from the 10th century was probably due to demographic and technological factors (e.g., spread of the moldboard plow) that are unlikely to be butterflied. However, the Byzantines, having a maritime and commercial orientation, are now positioned to collect the trade profits that in OTL went to Venice and other Italian cities.

-- Rick
 
I expect that some islands will continue to be Greek, some will continue to be Romance/latin speaking, and Malta will continue to speak it's Semitic language.
They will get their ship timber from the coastal areas by purchase. Especially Illyrian because that's where the mountains basically come down to the sea where they are convenient to shipping. They might ban goats from some islands to grow timber there, as a military measure.
Hey, they might go looking for the legendary island of Madeira. Madeira means 'woods'.
Or even further. Vinland, anyone?
 
Top