WI: Trebizond recaptures Constantinople from the Latin Empire instead of Nicaea

[TheWitheredStriker]

The first thread I made on this forum, hoping all goes well with it. If something's off, please let me know.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Would it have been possible, following the Fourth Crusade, for the Komnenoi and their Empire of Trebizond to recapture Constantinople from the Latins instead of the Empire of Nicaea under the Palaeologii?

If I recall correctly, Alexios I Megas Komnenos started off with the best shot at recapturing Constantinople. He had a dynastic claim (he and his brother David were direct descendants of Andronikos I "Misophaes") and was hugely popular; the city of Trebizond opened its gates to him and his brother with little to no resistance. Alexios and David were also regarded as militarily and administratively competent; they're quite good at ruling, all in all. The main obstacle working against the Trapezuntines was geography, as they were the furthest away from Constantinople.

From what I remember, they lost their chance after Alexios was captured by the Seljuk Turks on a hunting trip and publicly tortured before the people of Sinope, a city the Turks forced him to cede (Sinope also happened to be a very wealthy city for Trebizond).

If this didn't happen, could the Komnenoi have eventually restored the ERE by capturing Constantinople? If so, how? And had they done so, would the ERE be able to recover (at least relatively)? I know that the Fourth Crusade mortally injured the ERE, but it still wasn't truly doomed beyond salvation until the Second Palaiologan Civil War, which is butterflied away by a Komnenoi recapture of Constantinople. The ERE would certainly lose its status as the main power of the region, but I believe it could still survive in Greece, Thrace, some neighbouring areas, and westernmost Anatolia as a medium power without the SPCW obliterating the empire's final remaining resources and military.

Tl;dr could Trebizond reform Byzantium instead of Nicaea, how, and what would the ramifications of this be?

 

[Italian Sock Monkey]

;dr could Trebizond reform Byzantium instead of Nicaea, how, and what would the ramifications of this be?

Short answer is no.

Geography alone prevents it. The absolute best case scenario would be for the Komnenoi to get a quasi PU over the Empire of Nicaea. Pooling their two resources/claims together via a marriage alliance. Unlikely but hey Trebizond became famous for marrying off their unusually beautiful Komnenoi Princesses so who knows. Even if that was accomplished and this Nicaea/Trebizond PU alliance was stable (it wouldn't be) ultimately I don't see this changing much. The ERE was a ghost after Manzikert and it was a ghost of a ghost after the 4th Crusade. If you want to save the ERE you have to get Basil II to have a competent heir and butterfly away Manzikert.

 

[UnaiB]

@Basileus_Komnenos

 

[Flavius Iulius Nepos]

Short answer is no.

Geography alone prevents it.

You know that at its peak, Trebizond bordered the Latin Empire? If anything it was the Epirote that were at geographical disadvantage, and even they manage to get close enough to threaten Constantinople.

The ERE was a ghost after Manzikert

This completely ignores the Komnenian renaissance.

and it was a ghost of a ghost after the 4th Crusade.

and this ignores how absurdly wealthy Nicea was.

If you want to save the ERE you have to get Basil II to have a competent heir and butterfly away Manzikert.

A good POD, but not necessarily the last one that could save the empire. Even a POD in the early XIV century would work.

If this didn't happen, could the Komnenoi have eventually restored the ERE by capturing Constantinople? If so, how? And had they done so, would the ERE be able to recover (at least relatively)? I know that the Fourth Crusade mortally injured the ERE, but it still wasn't truly doomed beyond salvation until the Second Palaiologan Civil War, which is butterflied away by a Komnenoi recapture of Constantinople. The ERE would certainly lose its status as the main power of the region, but I believe it could still survive in Greece, Thrace, some neighbouring areas, and westernmost Anatolia as a medium power without the SPCW obliterating the empire's final remaining resources and military.

Gaining complete hegemony over the empire's remaining territory in Asia seems a given. IOTL, with the fall of Sinope, Nicea didn't have much to worry about Trebizond. I can't see a geographical equivalent here that would isolate Nicea from the rest of the Roman world, meaning they would have to be taken out militarily. After that, with the combined resources of two and at very least a decent leadership, Constantinople should be within reach. In the long run, they could even return to the status of great power. But that is a process that would require more than a century of two of hard work.

 

[Italian Sock Monkey]

You know that at its peak, Trebizond bordered the Latin Empire?

Source for that? I've always understood that Trebizond functionally became a city state after Alexios' death and the capture/hand over of Sinope.

This completely ignores the Komnenian renaissance.

Sighhh I'm going to get a lot of hate for this but the Komnenian 'renaissance' was just the after effect of the West bailing the Byzantines out of their mess. If it hadn't been for the first crusade Western Anatolia would have never been recovered. That's not to say there wasn't a great emperor to come from the Komnenian (oh John II, if only you could have lived another 10 years) or that I greatly respect Alexios for swallowing his pride and asking for help. However the truth remains that as soon as the Latin goodwill was eradicated by the Massacre of the Latins and the Byzantines were politically isolated they collapsed. They couldn't hold on to Bulgaria, they couldn't hold on to their own capital.

and this ignores how absurdly wealthy Nicea was.

And all that wealth and manpower was sapped reclaiming Constantinople and Greece, leaving western Anatolia to be overrun.

Even a POD in the early XIV century would work.

Completely disagree. Anatolia was the Empire's heartland, without it the ERE was done. Greece could never have served as a safe manpower pool without southern italy under byzantine control.

 

[Curtain Jerker]

A good POD, but not necessarily the last one that could save the empire. Even a POD in the early XIV century would work.

Yep. Any POD before the civil war of the 1340s works. After that it is all over but the shouting but before that you have tons of ways you can keep and even expand the empire.

 

[Evil Crusader]

The main problem is that they didn't seem to care enough about the whole Imperial mess, besides styling themselves Emperors that is. They did briefly border the Latin Empire, but it was more about exploiting a power vacuum than it was about military strength; Trebizond was a commercial and diplomatic power, but lacked in armies every bit as it didn't lack enemies. That is the elephant in the room.
They'd have to either get through Nicaea, or everybody suddenly die out, for Trebizond to stand a serious chance at lucking upon Constantinople as happened in OTL 1261; with less bravado and more savvy diplomacy I think the Empire has a decent chance at doing well by having a shorter list of enemies willing to fight it, even.

 

[fdas]

However the truth remains that as soon as the Latin goodwill was eradicated by the Massacre of the Latins and the Byzantines were politically isolated they collapsed

Well, if those events could be prevented and good relationship with the crusaders were maintained until the Byzantines could reconquer Anatolia, then they would be secure in the long run.

 

[Flavius Iulius Nepos]

Source for that? I've always understood that Trebizond functionally became a city state after Alexios' death and the capture/hand over of Sinope.

Indeed Trebizond's peak was before Alexios' hand over of Sinope. If I remember correctly, the Komnenians (led by David) expanded as far as Paphlagonia, with neighbouring Bythinia being in the hands of the Latins. Meaning the two were neighbours for a while.

Sighhh I'm going to get a lot of hate for this but the Komnenian 'renaissance' was just the after effect of the West bailing the Byzantines out of their mess. If it hadn't been for the first crusade Western Anatolia would have never been recovered. That's not to say there wasn't a great emperor to come from the Komnenian (oh John II, if only you could have lived another 10 years) or that I greatly respect Alexios for swallowing his pride and asking for help. However the truth remains that as soon as the Latin goodwill was eradicated by the Massacre of the Latins and the Byzantines were politically isolated they collapsed. They couldn't hold on to Bulgaria, they couldn't hold on to their own capital.

Alexios Komnenos managed to conquer the throne, repel the Normans, the Pechenegs and and Tzachas all without Western bailing him out. By the time the first crusade took place, the Romans (with their European holdings now secure) were about to make their own attempt in Asia. After all they asked for mercenaries (meaning they had the money to pay for them), not a crusade. Sure, in the end they took advantage of the situation but it was not the only way for Alexios to get a foothold in Anatolia.
As for Bulgaria, they managed to hold onto it for more than a century without much of Anatolia, they could have continued doing so without the Angeloi.

And all that wealth and manpower was sapped reclaiming Constantinople and Greece, leaving western Anatolia to be overrun.

That is more a consequence of the way Michael VIII came to power and how his son was not the best emperor to rule over the empire. A slower and more careful approach to European affairs would be a boon, but Greece and Constantinople did not doom Anatolia.

Completely disagree. Anatolia was the Empire's heartland, without it the ERE was done. Greece could never have served as a safe manpower pool without southern italy under byzantine control.

I don't really see the Ottomans expanding into the Balkans if a united empires controls everything from Morea/Epirus (as Kantakuzenos wanted) to Constantinople and doesn't invite them to Europe when there effectively was a power vacuum to be exploited.

 

[Italian Sock Monkey]

Well, if those events could be prevented and good relationship with the crusaders were maintained until the Byzantines could reconquer Anatolia, then they would be secure in the long run.

Precisely why I think John II, had he lived longer, could have ushered in a true Komnenian renaissance. The Euphrates was his goal, and with the Danube/Bulgaria still under firm Imperial control (and in the process of Hellenizing) the ERE could have once again stood on it's own. Client stating the Crusader Kingdoms would have just been the cherry on the top.

 

[el t]

Short answer is no.

Geography alone prevents it. The absolute best case scenario would be for the Komnenoi to get a quasi PU over the Empire of Nicaea. Pooling their two resources/claims together via a marriage alliance. Unlikely but hey Trebizond became famous for marrying off their unusually beautiful Komnenoi Princesses so who knows. Even if that was accomplished and this Nicaea/Trebizond PU alliance was stable (it wouldn't be) ultimately I don't see this changing much. The ERE was a ghost after Manzikert and it was a ghost of a ghost after the 4th Crusade. If you want to save the ERE you have to get Basil II to have a competent heir and butterfly away Manzikert.

I strongly agree. It's just not geographically very feasible.

 

[Haegon]

Good POV is an alternate sejuilk civil war allows Trebizond to send more troops and nor does Sejuilk attack Komnenoid realm permitting Latin Empire to declare neutrality as it was with Latin troops that allowed Nicaea to win. With more troops being present they are too scared to intervne
Until 1214 Trebizond looked poised to retake Constantinople,with no Latins and a larger army along with possible death of Theodore Laskirs in battle,his "empire" may fall in its entirety as remaining forces will surrender because this was considered a civil war. This happenned to the forts in North Western Anatolia which surrendered to Niceae after death of David Komnenos.

 

[SlyDessertFox]

Alexios Komnenos managed to conquer the throne, repel the Normans, the Pechenegs and and Tzachas all without Western bailing him out. By the time the first crusade took place, the Romans (with their European holdings now secure) were about to make their own attempt in Asia. After all they asked for mercenaries (meaning they had the money to pay for them), not a crusade. Sure, in the end they took advantage of the situation but it was not the only way for Alexios to get a foothold in Anatolia.

It's also important to remember that by every perception, the Crusader army was acting functionally as a Byzantine force up until the siege of antioch. At every step they were fed into the Byzantine military/bureaucratic/logistical machine and were focused on Byzantine targets in direct conjunction with Byzantine military leadership. They were, as you said, essentially Byzantine mercenaries, and it is not like this is the first time the Byzantines employed foreign forces to assist them in their wars. That the crusade essentially fell apart the moment they were deprived of Byzantine assistance suggests this was more than just a powerful western army bailing out an ailing empire.

Completely disagree. Anatolia was the Empire's heartland, without it the ERE was done. Greece could never have served as a safe manpower pool without southern italy under byzantine control.

I think this is overstating things a bit. While Anatolia was the empire's traditional heartland, it's important to recognize that the situation (regarding amount of territory under their control) in 1080 was essentially just an inverse of where they were at in the 9th century, with control over the Balkans and the loss of Anatolia substitute for control over western Anatolia and the loss of much of the Balkans.

 

[Flavius Iulius Nepos]

It's also important to remember that by every perception, the Crusader army was acting functionally as a Byzantine force up until the siege of antioch. At every step they were fed into the Byzantine military/bureaucratic/logistical machine and were focused on Byzantine targets in direct conjunction with Byzantine military leadership.

Which is something that is unfortunately usually ignored. The results of future Crusades, where cooperation with the empire was minimal, show this quite well. Btw, didn't a Fatimid embassy to the empire refer to the Crusaders as essentially mercenaries of Constantinople (they were basically asking Alexios to stop his "own soldiers")?

They were, as you said, essentially Byzantine mercenaries, and it is not like this is the first time the Byzantines employed foreign forces to assist them in their wars.

And I am pretty sure that, even without the Crusaders, there were plenty of mercenaries for the Romans to employ at the time. Possibly even more willing to do what they were asked to.

That the crusade essentially fell apart the moment they were deprived of Byzantine assistance suggests this was more than just a powerful western army bailing out an ailing empire.

As Alexios' campaigns in the Balkans against literally everyone clearly showed. Which unfortunately is the most overlooked part of this emperor's career. The empire still had resources to employ and, as long as it could entirely focus on one enemy at a time, could slowly claw back lost territories.

I think this is overstating things a bit. While Anatolia was the empire's traditional heartland, it's important to recognize that the situation (regarding amount of territory under their control) in 1080 was essentially just an inverse of where they were at in the 9th century, with control over the Balkans and the loss of Anatolia substitute for control over western Anatolia and the loss of much of the Balkans.

Probably the most disastrous moment for the empire was the loss of Bulgaria. Not only were precious resources lost to a new enemy, the dangerous situation that had threatened the empire in the past (an enemy so close to Constantinople) was back, this time without the possibility of counting on Anatolia for military help/buffer against eastern threats. The empire was once again forced to fight a two front war. But this was well after the Komnenian restoration.