WI: Henry of Flanders became Latin Emperor sooner/straight away?

IOTL, after the Sack of Constantinople in 1204 and the establishment of the Latin Empire, the Venetians picked Baldwin of Flanders (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldwin_I,_Latin_Emperor) to be Emperor. IOTL, at the Battle of Adrianople, Baldwin was captured, presumably eventually killed, by the Bulgarians, leading to his brother, Henry (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_of_Flanders), taking the throne. Henry proved to be more pragmatic and tolerant than many of the other Crusaders in Greece, and he defended what little was left of the Latin Empire with fewer men and resources than many of his enemies.

What if Baldwin had died either before or during the Sack of Constantinople, or between the sack and the Battle of Adrianople? With his men and resources not depleted, might the Latin Empire's chances have been better? I personally reckon that, if Henry avoids conflict with Kaloyan for as long as possible, he might be able to finish off Nicaea, and open the door for future expansion into Anatolia. I'm not knowledgable enough to go into the powder keg of religion...

Or was Henry's OTL approach (in regards to religion and warfare) have been the result of Adrianople and not his de-facto approach?

Any thoughts?
 
I personally think that the difference between Baldwin's brief rule and a slightly longer reign of Henry won't be enough to save the Latin Empire. Even if Henry takes the throne immediately, he'll be starting with a heavily feudalized empire. The emperor's power will be limited, and most of the barons under him do not share his (relatively) tolerant ideals. Also, avoiding conflict takes two - and Kaloyan may or may not be interested...
 
I personally think that the difference between Baldwin's brief rule and a slightly longer reign of Henry won't be enough to save the Latin Empire. Even if Henry takes the throne immediately, he'll be starting with a heavily feudalized empire. The emperor's power will be limited, and most of the barons under him do not share his (relatively) tolerant ideals. Also, avoiding conflict takes two - and Kaloyan may or may not be interested...

What if Henry managed to expand his own powerbase, say by taking Bithynia, Mysia, Troas and Lydia from Nicaea and/or conquering Thessalonica before Boniface of Montferrat does?
 
What if Henry managed to expand his own powerbase, say by taking Bithynia, Mysia, Troas and Lydia from Nicaea and/or conquering Thessalonica before Boniface of Montferrat does?
You could just have the historical marriage between Henri and Agnes of Montferrat occur a few years earlier, keeping Boniface loyal, which would allow him to move again nicaea as soon as possible without having to subjugate thessalonica.

Honestly, nicaea was really weak early on, and Henri historically roflstomped them and other Byzantine successors on numerous occasions, frequently outnumbered or even taken by surprise. If Henri can hit them with everything he has early on, which surprisingly is actually considerable (apparently Baldwin, a much less capable king, raised tens of thousands of men for adrianople), he could quite possibly crush the laskarids. Attacking rum is an option, as they very consistently lost to..pretty much everyone at this time, actually. Even nicaea! The komnenos would be a problem though, and best left alone.

Overall, with Henri in power, he wouldn't make the same empire-destroying mistakes Baldwin did, like turning a surefire alliance with Bulgaria into a complete disaster that nearly ended the empire within a decade of its creation. The Latin empire, god willing, may have a chance.
 
Could this result in Epirus rather than Nicaea restoring the Empire?

That would depend on how long Michael Komnenos Douias lasts with someone like Henry in charge from the start, whether or not his brother Theodore succeeds him and how capable Henry's successors are.
 
I guess one thing that Henry is going to have to consider is the empire's near-dependence on Venice, especially if, during a conquest of Nicaea, the Venetians end up taking over Rhodes (though IOTL they were busy with taking Crete from the Genoese). Sooner or later, the empire might need a fleet of their own. And interms of the economy, beyond trying to incorporate the Greeks, I'm not sure what they could do. Economics isn't my strong point.
 
Last edited:
Overall, with Henri in power, he wouldn't make the same empire-destroying mistakes Baldwin did, like turning a surefire alliance with Bulgaria into a complete disaster that nearly ended the empire within a decade of its creation. The Latin empire, god willing, may have a chance.

You could just have the historical marriage between Henri and Agnes of Montferrat occur a few years earlier, keeping Boniface loyal, which would allow him to move again nicaea as soon as possible without having to subjugate thessalonica.

I was thinking of Henry marrying Maria of Bulgaria (Kaloyan's daughter) or former Byzantine Empress Margaret of Hungary instead, but that could work too.

Other possibilites for a Hungarian alliance (to catch Bulgaria and Serbia in a pincer movement) I see are:

* King Ladislaus III of Hungary marrying either a daughter of Henry and Agnes of Montferrat, or one of Henry's de Courtenay nieces, either Isabella or Yolanda (OTL second wife of Andrew II).
* A son of Henry and Agnes of Montferrat marrying Anna Maria, eldest daughter of King Andrew II of Hungary.

Alternatively, if the Henry wants to maintain ties with Venice, a son of his could marry Anna Dandolo (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Dandolo), Enrico's granddaughter. Or, as an alternative, Stephanie of Armenia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephanie_of_Armenia).

Honestly, nicaea was really weak early on, and Henri historically roflstomped them and other Byzantine successors on numerous occasions, frequently outnumbered or even taken by surprise. If Henri can hit them with everything he has early on, which surprisingly is actually considerable (apparently Baldwin, a much less capable king, raised tens of thousands of men for adrianople), he could quite possibly crush the laskarids. Attacking rum is an option, as they very consistently lost to..pretty much everyone at this time, actually. Even nicaea! The komnenos would be a problem though, and best left alone.

I think Nicaean territory is doable, but not so much Seljuk territory. The reign of Kaykhusraw I and his sons are considered the apogee of Seljuk power in Anatolia, and historically Crusader armies generally didn't do well in Central Anatolia, especially in pitched battles. I could see the crusaders sticking to coastal Anatolia, maybe trying to contact Armenian Cilicia and Trebizond.

As for Trebizond, David Komnenos, when he was ruler of Sinope, Amastris, Tios and Heraclea Pontica, made overtures to Henry about becoming his nominal subject in exchange for protection from Theodore Laskaris and the Seljuks. That may not last long though.
 
Last edited:
Just wondering, did Pope Innocent III have a definite opinion about Baldwin of Flanders being proclaimed and crowned Emperor? I know that his successor, Honorius III, when Pierre de Courtenay passed through Rome on his way to Constantinople, made sure to crown him outside the city for fear of him using such an act to claim sovereignty over him, like the Holy Roman Emperors did. But I'm not too certain about Innocent himself, other than that he condoned the Fourth Crusade diverting from the Holy Land to Zara and then Constantinople, and he condoned the Sacking of Constantinople, but then changed his mind.
 
Top