The eagle's left head

[Lascaris]

Nymphaion, Asia Minor, March 25th, 1255

Theodore II Lascaris, Faithful to Christ the God, basileus of the Romans, looked at the new complication before himself with some concern. For ten years nothing had come of the marriage of his father with that little German. Or should he say Italian? After all her mother, Bianca of Lancia had been Italian. And her grandmother Constance had been a princess of the kingdom of Sicily. He dismissed the thought, not all times were for philosophy, as he carefully raised the crying complication in his hands. The complication, start laughing at him. Then showing complete lack of propriety it start pissing on the Imperial purple. Theodore start laughing as he put his brother back to the cradle. No he would not feel endangered by the posthumous son of his father, a mere baby. He was better man than that.

Nikaia, March 25th, 1256

Anna, widow of the basileus John III Vatatzes, born Constance to Frederick II Hohenstauffen, passed her son to the hands of patriarch Arsenios to proceed with the baptism.

"Baptised the servant of god... "

"Alexander!" his godfather and elder brother proclaimed. Anna hid a smile. Theodore was technically her stepson even though he was ten years her senior. Following the death of John III he had refused, her brother's Manfred requests to return her to the Sicilian court, which she understood even if it had only served to increase Manfred's hostility to him, but then Manfred had already established a marital alliance with the rival despot of Epirus and actively supported him against the emperor. But Theodore 's behavior towards her and his little brother was impeccable, he had even become godfather to him, which made it all the more difficult to dispose of him later. But the name... the name on one hand was living proof of how much the emperor was enamored with the ancients. On the other hand the empire had had only a single emperor named Alexander ever, for a few months or a couple of years, her tutors had told her but she could not remember, over 3 centuries ago and by all accounts he had been a useless one...

Constantinople, August 15th, 1262

Michael VIII, Faithful to Christ the God, basileus of the Romans, first of the house of Palaiologos suppressed a sigh. That bastard of a patriarch Arsenios, kept being more trouble than a mere patriarch had any right being. What did he think that they were in the Latin lands and he was the pope? First bothering him to protect the rights of little John, the late Theodore's son and have him as co-emperor. Then condemning him about blinding John. Now telling him he should not divorce his wife to marry Anna, who had refused the marriage no doubt due to the patriarch. Was he wrong for not blinding her son along with John? After all he was potentially a threat. But no, any such thing and all chances of getting her would be gone. Besides her relatives in Latin Europe would become even more of a problem. No the late Theodore was right in this, young Alexander was a manageable risk...

 

[HerodotosofBerlin]

A surprise to be sure, but a welcome one

 

[Josh e b]

Loving the story hope it ends up with brothers supporting each other and little bro’s mom just gets sidelined but not likely

 

[HerodotosofBerlin]

Is "Start" in the wrong form in the first Paragraph or am i missing something?

 

[Flavius Iulius Nepos]

Excited to see the start of a new timeline from you. I’m going to follow the revival of the empire.
Just two minor nitpicks: I think you probably meant the despot of Epirus rather than the despot of Sicily. Also, about the name Alexander, there was another emperor with the same name (this one ruled for about 13 years) and an usurper around the time of Constantine (if you count usurpers as emperors).

 

[Xenophonte]

Interesting start.

 

[Whiteshore]

There once was a dream. A dream worth fighting for. A dream called Rome. And yet, as a result of the actions of the foul Enrico Dandolo, said dream has become a nightmare.

 

[Lascaris]

Loving the story hope it ends up with brothers supporting each other and little bro’s mom just gets sidelined but not likely

The older brother, Theodore II Lascaris died on schedule in 1258. His 8 year old son John IV Lascaris became emperor with John Mouzalon as regent. Michael Palaiologos, overthrew and murdered the regent in a coup then became co-emperor in January 1259, then after the liberation of Constantinople ordered 11 year old John blinded and imprisoned in Christmas 1261. This apparently came with a fair bit of prodding by Michael's elder sister Irene who wanted to secure the position of Michael's own son Andronikos to the throne, otherwise come Michael's death there was a fair chance of John coming on top.

And didn't securing Andronikos the throne and the walking disaster holding to it for 46 years work just peachy for the empire?

TTL the sole difference so far is that Anna had a son from John III at virtually the last moment and that the 8 year old out of a combination of good luck (Michael wanting to get his mom), being slightly removed from the throne, he's not properly a Lascaris and family connections in the west has avoided John's fate.

 

[Lascaris]

Excited to see the start of a new timeline from you. I’m going to follow the revival of the empire.
Just two minor nitpicks: I think you probably meant the despot of Epirus rather than the despot of Sicily. Also, about the name Alexander, there was another emperor with the same name (this one ruled for about 13 years) and an usurper around the time of Constantine (if you count usurpers as emperors).

Technically Alexander was co-emperor since 879 but ruled on his own only for a very limited period after the death of Leo VI.

 

[goumaister]

Can't say much on how this will go, I only know that this TL will be very good and detailed due to the author. I hope it doesn't slow down the other TL though. Anyhow watched and interested as to how this will go.

 

[Lascaris]

Benevento, February 26th, 1266

Manfred of Hohenstauffen lay dead on the battlefield. And so did most of his army. The 10,000 Saracen archers that had formed the majority of the army and who for most of the Hohenstauffen rule in Sicily had been personally loyal first to Manfred's father and then himself had been mercilessly cut down by the French. Out of the 3,600 German and Italo-Norman knights no more than 600 had escaped the disaster. Helena Angelina Doukas, Manfred's wife and daughter of despot Michael II of Epirus had been captured. So had their daughter Beatrix and the couple's three sons, all would be thrown to prison under bad conditions by the victorious French, Helena dying in captivity five years later. The victorious Charles of Anzou had carried all before him. Soon he would be in full control of the kingdom of Sicily.

Constantinople, April 30th, 1266

Eulogia Palaiologina, formerly Irene till she had become a nun after the death of her husband John Kantakouzinos was furious at her brother the emperor. "Why are you still keeping that little brat around? Blind him as you did with John. Don't you see he is a danger? if not to you then Andronikos? That brother of the French king took care of his uncle for good, neither he nor his mother are of any political value any more, to keep them around. And I'm pretty sure you don't want to get between Anna's legs anymore!"

Michael just sighed. "For someone who chose to name herself a blessing {1] you are not much of one are you?"

"Puns will not get you get away. You know I'm right!"

"Do I? Look where blinding Theodore's son got me. Arsenios excommunicated me and keeps insisting on my excommunication, I may well need to remove him from patriarch to lift the excommunication, which is trouble of its own. The Asian provinces are still loyal to house Lascaris not me and in near revolt. And you want me to go and exacerbate things by blinding Theodore's kid brother as well? Who technically isn't even a Lascaris, he''s a Vatatzes. To make sure the excommunication does not go away for good? I wonder if I should had just married John off to Irene. If Andronikos failed to succeed me then, with all the advantages he'll have that would be his fault. But either way my grandson, either from Andronikos or Irene, would be basileus."

"What is done, is done. And I still believe I advised you to do the right thing."

"Perhaps you have. But in the case of Alexandros you are mistaken. Not just for our internal political reasons. There are more Hohenstauffen's around. Conrad, the son of Conrad, Frederick's son, was the king of Sicily before Manfred took it over. He still has followers and supporters both in Germany and in Italy. And I'm weary about that Frenchman Charles of Anzou. I wonder whether he may prove even more of a problem than Manfred."

"How so?"

"He's hand in glove with the pope. The pope who is anything but happy with us liberating Constantinople. And a very ambitious man. What if his ambitions reach all the way to us? Having in court someone with a claim to the throne of Sicily could come in handy."

"If said someone did not also have a claim to the purple."

"A very unlikely claim to the purple. You try making me get afraid of an eleven year old kid and his mother. I won't. Both might be useful to me. And if not they can always be dealt with."

And thus Alexandros Komnenos Doukas Vatatzes, had once more escaped danger. For the time being...

[1] Eulogia means blessing in Greek.

 

[HerodotosofBerlin]

So Alexander is going to replace incompetent Andronikos, aka. "trust me assassinating this mercenary leader will definetly work" Andronikos ?

 

[Elfwine]

If Alexander does replace Andronikos, I do have to wonder how much better he'll actually do.

Not to defend Andronikos II too far, but I would be hesitant at best to say he was the worst option for the empire.

If Michael just tries to make him a claimant for Sicily...we shall see how that goes, I guess.

 

[goumaister]

If Michael just tries to make him a claimant for Sicily...we shall see how that goes, I guess.

Now that you mention it, the title says the eagle's left head which means the western head....
I don't know if it is a wise move to put on a throne so close to home and so powerful one at that, someone with a claim to your son's throne. But you never know.
I don't thinks something other than the existence of Alexander is different form OTL right?

 

[Lascaris]

If Alexander does replace Andronikos, I do have to wonder how much better he'll actually do.

Not to defend Andronikos II too far, but I would be hesitant at best to say he was the worst option for the empire.

Andronikos took a set of very questionable decisions through his reign. Dismantling the army and navy early in his reign is the most obvious one.

If Michael just tries to make him a claimant for Sicily...we shall see how that goes, I guess.

Alexander does have a claim on the Sicilian throne yes. By Western dynastic standards at the moment it is not the best one. There is obviously Conradin who after all IS king of Sicily on paper. If Conradin is gone then Manfred has three sons who may be imprisoned but are still very much alive and of course two daughters. Now who has the better claim between the sons of Perer III of Aragon, who are grandsons of Manfred by way of his daughter and Alexander who is Manfred's nephew from his sister... well the former if it came to such a question have the crown of Aragon on their back. Alexander then is grandson of Frederick II. On the third hand he is Greek Orthodox and the popes may well hate him on sight for being Frederick's grandson...

 

[Elfwine]

Now that you mention it, the title says the eagle's left head which means the western head....
I don't know if it is a wise move to put on a throne so close to home and so powerful one at that, someone with a claim to your son's throne. But you never know.
I don't thinks something other than the existence of Alexander is different form OTL right?

Michael seems substantially less ruthless than my understanding of OTL, but that's my reading of this rather than what the author has said.

Andronikos took a set of very questionable decisions through his reign. Dismantling the army and navy early in his reign is the most obvious one.

I didn't say he didn't.

But I know nothing about Alexander except that you decided to explore "What if John III had another son?" If I had to pick between Andronikos II and say, the earlier Alexander or Alexios III, I'd pick Michael's son in a heartbeat. And I hope this ends with whoever is emperor in a better financial position than that of OTL 1282 as far as Andronikos's military decisions. Someone else would have done differently, someone else still has a situation "better" is a challenge.

Alexander does have a claim on the Sicilian throne yes. By Western dynastic standards at the moment it is not the best one. There is obviously Conradin who after all IS king of Sicily on paper. If Conradin is gone then Manfred has three sons who may be imprisoned but are still very much alive and of course two daughters. Now who has the better claim between the sons of Perer III of Aragon, who are grandsons of Manfred by way of his daughter and Alexander who is Manfred's nephew from his sister... well the former if it came to such a question have the crown of Aragon on their back. Alexander then is grandson of Frederick II. On the third hand he is Greek Orthodox and the popes may well hate him on sight for being Frederick's grandson...

Yeah, but Alexander doesn't have to be accepted as king to have "make him a claimant" be useful for Michael.

 

[Lascaris]

Michael seems substantially less ruthless than my understanding of OTL, but that's my reading of this rather than what the author has said.

I'm not entirely certain I agree. In my reading he was assuredly ruthless. He was also pragmatic to a fault, willing to take difficult decisions and often capable of looking at least a few moves ahead. Alexandros is a useful asset here, why waste it if there is no reason to burn it? He is also probably quite lucky in Michael if we are to believe Pachymeres and I don't see any primary source refuting the story liking his mom enough to want to divorce his own wife and marry her. Now Geanakopoulos discounted the story arguing that "what militates against Pachymeres' statement, however, is the question why Michael, merely for love of Anna, would be willing to risk almost certain excommunication by the Patriarch Arsenios without the gaining of an important political benefit." To which I note... that he was already excommunicated and why Pachymeres would be inventing the story in the first place?

I didn't say he didn't.

But I know nothing about Alexander except that you decided to explore "What if John III had another son?" If I had to pick between Andronikos II and say, the earlier Alexander or Alexios III, I'd pick Michael's son in a heartbeat. And I hope this ends with whoever is emperor in a better financial position than that of OTL 1282 as far as Andronikos's military decisions. Someone else would have done differently, someone else still has a situation "better" is a challenge.

The first Alexander died in a year, Andronikos held to the throne for almost half a century. Was he dealt a difficult hand? Certainly but when all is said and done Andronikos inherited from Michael a country with various issues yes but that was still a major power surrounded by mostly weaker states and the existential threat faced by his father already neutralized. In short a much better situation than many of his predecessors.

Yeah, but Alexander doesn't have to be accepted as king to have "make him a claimant" be useful for Michael.

Oh certainly. For Michael he is a useful pawn against Charles... or for that matter surviving Hohenstauffen and their relatives. How useful he would be is a different question but keeping him around is straight off the Byzantine diplomatic playback, nevermind Michael's own shenanigans with the Bulgarian throne.

 

[Elfwine]

I'm not entirely certain I agree. In my reading he was assuredly ruthless. He was also pragmatic to a fault, willing to take difficult decisions and often capable of looking at least a few moves ahead. Alexandros is a useful asset here, why waste it if there is no reason to burn it? He is also probably quite lucky in Michael if we are to believe Pachymeres and I don't see any primary source refuting the story liking his mom enough to want to divorce his own wife and marry her. Now Geanakopoulos discounted the story arguing that "what militates against Pachymeres' statement, however, is the question why Michael, merely for love of Anna, would be willing to risk almost certain excommunication by the Patriarch Arsenios without the gaining of an important political benefit." To which I note... that he was already excommunicated and why Pachymeres would be inventing the story in the first place?

As far as Michael and Anna, I suspect if Michael had any interest there it was political more than romantic - but it's not like the two are mutually exclusive so far as seeing how this goes.

But it's easier to see him picturing ties to Manfred as (somehow) useful than as lovestruck, IMO. Your impression may vary - to be honest the story doesn't make a lot of sense to me and I'm not likely to be picking up on the right things here.

Edited to add:
I do find it hard to believe he needed anyone's persuasion to blind John, though. If he'd wanted to rule as say, Romanos I had for Constantine VII I think it's more likely John would have kept his eyes.

The first Alexander died in a year, Andronikos held to the throne for almost half a century. Was he dealt a difficult hand? Certainly but when all is said and done Andronikos inherited from Michael a country with various issues yes but that was still a major power surrounded by mostly weaker states and the existential threat faced by his father already neutralized. In short a much better situation than many of his predecessors.

I'd rather have a year of either than forty-six of either, but if I had to pick one to stick around for nearly half a century it would be Andronikos.

And I have to disagree on "better than many of his predecessors". I'd rather have say, Maurice's situation, or Justinian II's, than Andronikos's -and those were certainly bad places to be in.

 

[Lascaris]

As far as Michael and Anna, I suspect if Michael had any interest there it was political more than romantic - but it's not like the two are mutually exclusive so far as seeing how this goes.

But it's easier to see him picturing ties to Manfred as (somehow) useful than as lovestruck, IMO. Your impression may vary - to be honest the story doesn't make a lot of sense to me and I'm not likely to be picking up on the right things here.

Edited to add:
I do find it hard to believe he needed anyone's persuasion to blind John, though. If he'd wanted to rule as say, Romanos I had for Constantine VII I think it's more likely John would have kept his eyes.

The sources say Irene/Eulogia did press him. How much pressing he needed? Probably very little. But I was thinking Constantine Doukas with Alexios I here. Alexios did betroth Constantine with Anna... and even wanted to leave his own wife for Maria of Alania. Michael would likely be well aware of the story, it's two centuries before him with his own ancestors involved...

I'd rather have a year of either than forty-six of either, but if I had to pick one to stick around for nearly half a century it would be Andronikos.

And I have to disagree on "better than many of his predecessors". I'd rather have say, Maurice's situation, or Justinian II's, than Andronikos's -and those were certainly bad places to be in.

Would you have... John III's situation or Alexios I instead?

 

[Elfwine]

The sources say Irene/Eulogia did press him. How much pressing he needed? Probably very little. But I was thinking Constantine Doukas with Alexios I here. Alexios did betroth Constantine with Anna... and even wanted to leave his own wife for Maria of Alania. Michael would likely be well aware of the story, it's two centuries before him with his own ancestors involved...

He likely would. It is interesting to think about.

Would you have... John III's situation or Alexios I instead?

Probably John's yes actually, I don't think I could give you an immediate answer on Alexios I's.