The Komnenenes and Ayyubids last.

Both of these empires peaked and ran into trouble at about the same time, but WI they retained their strength for an extra few decades? I'm hazy on the PoDs, perhaps Manuel wasn't obesessed with the west and Saladin organised an orderly sucession.
 
Perhaps the Komnenids could survive in power longer by delaying the Battle of Myriokephalon in 1176. In OTL, this comparatively minor defeat greatly depressed the Emperor Manuel Komnenos (then aged fifty eight) and led to the loss of his once active personality, and finally his death four years later. If Myriokephalon is avoided or won, perhaps Manuel can survive for say six years longer than in OTL, dying in 1186, allowing his son Alexios II to avoid a period of regency, and come to the throne of a relatively intact Empire in 1186. Alexios proves to be a relatively competent Emperor, subdues the Bulgar rebellion, manages the Third Crusade less horribly than the Angeloi did in OTL, and reigns until the 1220s. His successors deal with the Mongols deftly, and win back Anatolia once the Turks are broken. The Komnenid dynasty is then roughly secured.
 
From what I understand the loss at Myriokephalon was because Manuel was obsessed with the west and left the east alone for 11 years, allowing one Islamic power to gain supremacy. When Manuel turned to face them he was defeated by a powerful foe rather than one among many squabbling powers. So the PoD is Manuel being even handed with both east and west, he doesn't have his court full of westerners, chase opportunities in the west while ignoring the east, and not allowing the social structure of the empire to drift toward a fuedal nature. That way even if he does die at the same time there won't be a backlash against the regency.
 
Komnenenes and Ayyubids.

Muslim states in medieval times nearly always depended on the strength of their rulers. It is rare for an orderly succession to be arranged in a Muslim state. Their socio/political system tended to prevent this.
 
A smart, strong leader like Saladin surely could have organised a smooth succession even in those circumstances. He could put his favoured son into prime position to take power upon his death and put his other sons into position where they wouldn't be able to rally much support against him.

Saladin had at his command the Turks, with their horse archers, and the legacy of the Fatmids with their Lancers and infantry. Could have his orderly, capable successor have forged this into a military machine able to deal with anything?
 
A random thought for a PoD, Andronicus succeeds Manuel for whatever reason. Starting 2 years earlier he could launch his campaign against fuedalism without his later paranoia. He may get more than 3 years that he got IOTL and succeeded in breaking to excessive power of the nobles. Whatever happens after that won't be as important as reversing the social movement toward fuedalism, what's more without excessively powerful nobles the dynasty should be more secure.
 
Top