WI : Constantine XI successfully retreats from Constantinople

Hey, so I'm working on a timeline involving a surviving Roman leadership after 1453.

I'm curious as to what parties would be interested in a Constantine XI leading a Byzantine Diaspora, largely made of pro-unionists and why.

So making the assumption that he flees the city assisted by a last ditch effort by the Byzantine fleet, and makes a stop in Morea before sailing onwards to Genoa - which parties would be interested in the Byzantine Emperor in Exile?

Ottomans - Would rather have nobody that would contest leadership of the Rum Millet.
Prince Orhan (technically part of the Exile Court) - A Turk who also has a claim to the Ottoman throne, was a commander in the defence of Constantinople
The Papacy - A Pro-Unionist Roman Emperor, whilst very weak, could have some interest, perhaps to ensure that any Roman Restoration is Catholic.
The Holy Roman Emperor - The only other person who can legitimately claim to be the Rightful Roman Emperor is at his doorstep, this could be used - but considering recently the Roman Emperor has been denegrated as King of the Greeks, would they be interested/take action?
Various Italian City States - Romans bring books, knowledge and expertise. Sheltering them could bring more, possibly creating great wealth in a "Roman Quarter" in their cities.
Constantine XI - He wants to stay relevant! Leader of the Roman People? King of the Romans (but holds no territory?)
The Romans of .. Rome. Their nomenclature is going to get confusing if they don't just use Greek and Latin as replacements
The Romans of .. Greece. Having a leadership that could protect them abroad in a Greek Millet in Christendom could be preferable to Ottoman rule. Especially as they don't have to pay Jizya.
Montferrat - as a branch of the Palialogos are in charge here, they'd likely be heavily involved - how would they react to their cousins coming to stay?
Genoa - They've just been asked to host the Roman Empire, or what is left of its political structure.


I know I've listed a load, but I think the topic could have some interesting spin offs.
 
He won't leave.He was actually offered the opportunity to do so by Mehmed,but he decided to go down fighting.

I get where you're coming from, but considering that the Romans weren't exactly big on the whole "Last Stand" thing by this point - combined with his confidence that the walls would hold (which they did besides that gate) probably meant he never prepared to leave.

I'm positing that he at least made a fallback plan, after seeing 50+ days of having his walls bombarded by Orbans bombards.

Also, I can understand him not surrendering - this is essentially losing, but living to lead his people, even if it isn't the Roman Empire. These aren't the same things as surrendering.
 
Most likely he'd go to the Morea and rule from there, at least until the Ottomans get round to conquering that too.

I'm not so sure, we can't forget the Hexamilion has already been destroyed, and it took the Theodosians to not be overwhelmed in Constantinople. I don't think if he stayed in Morea he'd be staying for long.
 

Deleted member 97083

To organize an exodus, Constantine XI needs resources and authority over his people. If his empire has already been conquered, he doesn't have that.

For a large scale Byzantine community in western Europe or Greek diaspora in the New World, the Byzantine Empire has to be extant to allow that emigration. Otherwise, as dhimmi of the Ottomans, their options for movement become very limited. I would suggest a successful Crusade of Varna, as that's the only way the late Empire would have enough breathing room to be able to focus on non-military concerns.

Venice and Genoa could then provide means for the Greeks to emigrate. Princes of House Palaiologos would first venture out without the emperor, and attract the existing Byzantine diaspora in Italy into one location (probably Montferrat), like a western Mystras. Then if the empire falls, the actual emperor could flee to the already-existing overseas community. A location in Spain would provide the means for some of the Greeks to travel to the New World in the 16th century.

As for the path of migration I would suggest Constantinople -> Venetian Crete -> Naples -> Montferrat -> Barcelona.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's an odd thing to say, since the defense of Constantinople in 1453 is one of the greatest "last stands" in military history.

Oh, totally. The story is told as such - but that could just as easily be attributed to Greek Nationalism. The other interpretation was that he hung himself when the gatehouse fell. Rather than charge as we're told. I prefer the last stand story - best way for the Last Roman Emperor to be remembered, or a very good Nationalism story - Immortal Emperor who will rise to reconquer the old capital, or save Greece in their time of need? I give you King Arthur, or Genghis Khan.

I came across the idea that this wasn't true as I was researching his death (I wanted to know which way he charged - out of the walls, or into a force inside the walls), but only ever came up with "There were no witnesses to his death".
 
Any more for any more?

I did like your migration idea @Achaemenid Rome . I'm unaware how the Ottomans could significantly prevent Greeks (especially middle class Greeks) from leaving in either circumstance without deploying a significant amount of their fleet to intercepting merchants. I don't think I've ever seen anything addressing migration in the 1400s/1500s which wasn't the "Lets go colonise the new world", sort of migration.

I mean, even if you had two-three greek diaspora passengers per merchant ship, that starts to build up over time. Admittedly this is the passive movement, and I think you may have been looking at active relocation. That couldn't really be done in my scenario, it would have to focus on enticing the pull factors on Greeks.

I actually think this could be an unexpected boon for the Ottomans - a strong Greek community in Italy means the Ottomans have a population with cousins to trade with. Rather than the Venetian trick of "Trading to save artefacts" - let the Greeks do it. Jews did banking, Greeks do trade - everybody wins, as long as things are peaceful.
 
Top