• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Boo, your guest writer sucks!
This Kommunaut fellow needs to learn how to write properly!

So what you're saying is, you want another guestpost?

Noo, the evil goblins shall overcome this way!

That was never really in doubt. Goblins been secretly running the Empire since at least Hadrian.

Falsee...tricksy! Not very nice at all, my precious.

If only Basil was sane enough to invite Gabriel and Zeno to a tunnel, yess, a tunnel, preciousss.

And now, a celebratory update. This time no pictures, but a theme song instead. True, the song isn't about Basil the Mad, but a Byzantine Emperor does get overthrown, so it's relevant. Somewhat.
 
The Conspiracy of Zeno.

We now come to one of the most controversial and opaque episodes in the entire middle period of Imperial history: the imprisonment and subsequent death of Basil the Mad. The traditional narrative, first composed by court historian Theophilus Palaeologus during the reign of Emperor Andronicus, presents the episode as a glorious deliverance of the Empire from the hands of a dangerous madman into the care of St. Zeno, carried out at the instigation of Nobelissimus Gabriel. Theophilus is careful however to avoid implicating Zeno himself of any prior knowledge of the conspiracy. According to him, the conspiracy was formed after Basil ordered the execution of his son and heir Kaisar Basil in January 1189. The execution suddenly elevated Zeno, who was previously the Logothetes tou dromou, to Kaisar and heir to Basil. Gabriel then, who was supposed to have recognized Zeno's future greatness, quickly plotted to dispose of Basil to save the Kaisar's life and ensure his succession. In September 1189, Gabriel took Zeno to the permanent camps of the Scholai and the Exkoubitoi, and, after having the troops proclaim Zeno Basileus, marched them on Constantinople. There, after brushing aside a rather half-hearted resistance of the Varangian Guard , Gabriel arrested Harald Vigleiksson before arresting Basil himself and forcing him to abdicate and retire to the Stoudion monastery. The very next day the Senate officially proclaimed Zeno Emperor.

There are a number of problems with Theophilus' account, not the least being that by the time it was written, Zeno had already been glorified and any smear on his character would be politically unwise in the extreme. It is also improbable that Zeno followed Gabriel to the barracks of the tagmata without any knowledge of the conspiracy, as Theophilus would have us believe. Perhaps the only accusation levied against him in the recent years that we can exonerate him of is the charge that he contrived the death of Kaisar Basil. There are numerous indications that Basil the Mad was extremely unstable by 1189, and in fact there are reports that not long after his son's death he ceased functioning completely for weeks at a time, spending weeks at a time sitting immobile in the Imperial Bedchambers, interrupted only occasionally by bouts of frenetic activity and torrents of nonsensical speech. It is unsurprising then that some action was taken to remove him, since at that time the Emperor's condition was already widely known and the Empire was on the brink of civil war.

Of course, none of the details can be known with complete certainty. It is however fairly safe to assume that Zeno was fully aware of the conspiracy well before his and Gabriel's march on Constantinople, even if he might not have originated it. At any rate, Basil was so unpopular by the time of his abdication that everyone was content to leave him at Stoudion, where he quietly died on December 23rd, 1189.
 
He...er....he took the monatic vow. That's how it works.
 
All right, I feel I've been away long enough to warrant calling this the second resurrection of the AAR! Between school, Vicky 2 and DW, there has not been much time for this. Thankfully, this semester is much more relaxed, so there will be much more AAR from here on out. And as a side bonus, over winter break, I got my hands on a three volume work on Byzantine history, and thus have a vague idea as to what I'm talking about. Sadly, there wasn't much in it on social and economic history, so either I'll have to find a work that does cover that or restrain myself and stick to the political and military narrative. Which would be a shame, fiscal policies and agricultural yields are much more fun.


The vicegerent of Christ cannot abdicate?

If he cannot, he will be taught how to, and he will not, he will be forced!

He...er....he took the monatic vow. That's how it works.

And much like real life, the monastery hazing was so bad he did not live through it. Someone ought to do something about them monks.
 
Europe in AD 1200

1200copy.jpg

Political map of Europe in AD 1200. The Eastern Frankish Empire is both the areas of white and black, the black areas are held by supporters of the de jure emperor, while the white areas are held by supporters of the Lombard pretender.

Up to this point, our narrative was mainly concerned with the internal events in the Roman Empire, mentioning the outside world only whenever some part of it waged war on the Empire. However, the world did not stand still in the 150 years since the beginning of our narrative, and understanding these changes, particularly those that led to the fall of the Eastern Frankish Empire, are key to understanding St. Zeno's reign.

There are three main trends in this period. The first, already covered in much detail, is the resumption of the Macedonian Restoration of the Empire as the Comnenian Restoration, and the recovery of many lands lost to barbarians in previous centuries. The second is the nearly universal retreat of Islam across Europe and North Africa and the subjugation of all non-Christian peoples of Northern and Eastern Europe. The third is the increasing instability and fracturing of the barbarian kingdoms of Europe into hundreds of mini-states. Nominally, these mini-states, known as duchies and counties (the barbarians adopted names of Imperial offices of Late Antiquity as aristocratic titles), were just large landholding within the various kingdoms, but in practice, central authority over the landholdings was non-existent.

The second trend is most clearly seen in Hispania, the Levant, and Egypt. In Hispania, after Demetrios I's withdrawal from the wars, the Emirate of Aquitaine managed to survive, and resist all Frankish attempts at reconquest. The Franks, seeing the futility of the war, signed a Perpetual Peace with the Aqutanians, which allowed them to mount a naval invasion of the Taifa states in Hispania proper. The Moors were taken by surprise, and by AD 1200 more than half of the peninsula was in the hands of Franks and their local Christian allies. The North African Moors of Mauretania suffered a similar fate, largely being subjugated by the Republic of Genoa in its "Crusading" efforts.

Meanwhile, the Fatimid Caliphate in Egypt came under repeated attacks of Polish, Hungarian, Bohemian, and, curiously, British crusaders. The Fatimids were unable to organize as broad a coalition as the Christians to defend themselves, and the Caliphate fell in 1183 with the death of Caliph Anwar Fatimid in the Siege of Cairo. The victorious crusaders reorganized the area into the Kingdom of Jerusalem (consisted of the Levant south of the Imperial border and Sinai) and the Kingdom of Egypt (Egypt proper). However, these crusader kings never succeeded in building centralized states, and the area remained a patchwork of squabbling feudal states for centuries to come.

Unrelated to the Crusades, but equally important, was the decline of the Seljuk authority in Mesopotamia and Persia. It was the rebellion of the Uqaylid Emir of Mosul during the reign of Emperor Alexius that forced Alp Arslan to abandon Asia Minor and allowed the Imperial reconquest of the Levant. The Emirate of Mosul was still independent and stronger than ever in 1200, as during Alp Arslan's struggle with the Uqaylid Emir more regions refused to acknowledge Seljuk authority, the most notable being the Emirate of Kermanshah in Persia. These breakaway Emirates were never completely subdued, and their struggle against the Seljuk Sultan effectively neutralized the Turkish threat to both the Empire and the fragile crusader states.

These developments, meant that for the first time in 800 years, the Empire had nothing to fear from the Muslims, and could focus its attention on the West, where vast territories still lay under barbarian rule, and for 400 years now, a Germanic king called himself "Emperor of the Romans". The struggle against this false Emperor occupied the majority of the reign of St. Zeno II.
 
Last edited:
I love - completely - the reverse-to-historical position of Frankish and Taifa states in Spain :p
 
A brief history of the Papacy and the Eastern Frankish Empire.

To understand the conflicts of St. Zeno II's reign, we must first take a step back and briefly examine the history of the Papacy and the Eastern Frankish Empire, as St. Zeno's wars are first and foremost an extension of the struggle between the Pope and the Frankish emperor.

At first glance, the fact that there was a struggle at all seems rather curious, as the Frankish Empire was created by Pope Leo III, who crowned the Frankish King Carolus "Magnus" Emperor of the Romans on Christmas Day AD 800. Oddly enough, this was not seen as a continuation of the second throne of the Indivisible Empire, last held by Romulus Augustulus in 476, but as Charlemagne assuming the now vacant throne of the Roman Empire. Of course, the throne was not vacant, but held by Empress Irene. To the Franks, however, this was of no consequence: a woman could not rule, and therefore, the throne was vacant. The fact that no clergyman could elevate a man to the purple, and that no barbarian has ever claimed to be Emperor before did not trouble Leo or the Franks much either.

In the end, the Frankish Empire did not survive Carolus for long. The western part split off, forming the Kingdom of France, or the Western Frankish Kingdom, consisting of Gaul, and the eastern part formed a state that called itself the Holy Roman Empire, but was in fact neither Holy nor Roman. It is for that reason it is usually referred to as the Eastern Frankish Empire in modern texts. This state consisted of Italy and the Kingdom of Germany. However, from the very outset it was not a centralized bureaucratically controlled state like the Roman Empire at the time, but, like all the rest of barbarian kingdoms, consisted of a patchwork of micro-states, headed by their own little hereditary monarchs. In the Eastern Frankish Empire this trend was especially pronounced, with some on these feudal sates actually becoming quite large. What proved even more disastrous for the longevity of the empire was the fact that some of these sates were controlled by powerful church officials, usually Archbishops of large cities. While the Church has always held some land in every Christian country, only in the Eastern Frankish Empire were the ecclesiastics able to amass enough land to essentially be kings of their own kingdoms.

At first, no one saw the inherent danger in that arrangement, as the Eastern Frankish emperor was in charge of appointing these Princes of the Church to their offices, and in fact relied on their loyalty against the hereditary nobles. Trouble came in 1073, with the election of Hildebrand of Sovana as Pope Gregory VII. Gregory had a vision of the Church as a divine institution set by God above all human institutions, with himself as God's vice-regent on Earth. Needless to say, this conflicted not only with Constantinople's position that the Roman Empire was a universal state, with the Emperor being God's vice-regent, but with the Eastern Frankish emperor's view that he reigned supreme in his own Empire. As early as 1075, Gregory clashed with Henry IV, Eastern Frankish Emperor at the time. The conflict between the two men threw the empire into a protracted Civil War that weakened the Franks and allowed Eusebios and Theodoros I to recover Italy. In the end, Henry was able to reconsolidate his power, but only after severe concessions that amounted to Papal supremacy over the Frankish Emperor.

Imperial expansion in Italy seemed to calm the tensions between the Pope and the Frankish Emperor, as the Pope was much more wary of the Emperor in Constantinople than of the one in Franconia. This fear proved well-justified, as Theodoros finished the imperial reconquest of Italy by permanently terminating the Pope's temporal power over Rome. Moreover, he mistreated the defeated Pope Victor IV severely, and had him defrocked. Victor then fled to Munich in what was then the Archbishopric of Bavaria in the Eastern Frankish Empire, and there proclaimed that his defrocking was invalid and that he was still the Bishop of Rome. Henry V, son of Henry IV, Gregory's arch nemesis, seizing on the opportunity to have a Pope in his pocket, vigorously supported Victor's claims in return for some concessions. The Investiture Controversy seemed over, at least for the time. The emperor reigned supreme over a diminished empire, and had his own bishop of Rome in Munich. This situation remained unperturbed until the 1190s.
 
Hilderbrand turns up right on time!