End of the Komnenian Age

1149 – 1205 A.D.

Fruits of Success

Political Realignments

The Later Years of Manuel Komnenos

Andronicus the Terrible

The City Lost

The Fall of Jerusalem

The Third Crusade

The Fourth Crusade

After some seven decades of Komnenian rule the Byzantine Empire had, if not completely recovered, then at least regained much of the power and prestige lost after Manzikert. But the Europe of the late 12th century was not the same as it had been in the early 11th. Powerful Western European rulers cast their eyes towards Constantinople and the wealth of its empire. It would be up to the Komnenoi emperors to keep them at bay.

While Manuel Komnenos had deftly handled the arrival of the second crusade, he likewise had to deal with the hatred incurred by its failure (Byzantium serving as a convenient scapegoat for the frustrated crusaders).

The Norman kings of Sicily attacked and raided the Empire, causing much destruction.

While the friendship between Manuel and the acting western emperor Conrad III had kept Byzantium’s enemies more or less at bay, his death (and replacement by the less than friendly Frederick Barbarossa) meant that the Empire had no reliable ally in Western Europe.

To waylay further aggression, the Byzantines proceeded to support the rebellious Norman barons of south Italy against their king.

This campaign was initially successful, and for a time it seemed that the old dream of reuniting the west and east under Constantinople’s aegis may yet be achieved. However, a counterattack by the Norman king succeeded in throwing the Byzantines back, and undoing all they and their allies had achieved. Eventually peace was agreed to on acceptable terms between the two belligerents, leaving the Norman barons to fend for themselves. King William I of Sicily

With the Normans temporarily neutralized, the emperor returned his attention to the eastern territories. One of the cruellest outrages of this period was an attack on Cyprus by the notorious Raynald of Châtillon, prince of Antioch.

So brutal was the sack of this peaceful, prosperous island, that it was said that it never fully recovered.

In response to this outrage Manuel launched a campaign against him, and Raynald threw himself on the emperor’s mercy, and was extremely lucky to receive it.

At the same time, Manuel met and befriended King Baldwin III of Jerusalem, and relations between Byzantium and Outremer were now closer than at any time in the past.

While Manuel also scored impressive victories over the Seljuk Turks, he eventually was forced to turn his gaze back to the western borders.

Manuel’s reign as a whole can be seen as an example of the predicament that was to haunt Byzantium for much of its later history, namely being caught between east and west. Even when one area was quiet, the other would often be a cause for concern, but if the quiet front was ignored too long, it might erupt into conflict once again.

Manuel proceeded to battle the Hungarians and Serbians, achieving an advantageous resolution in the Balkans for the Empire.

The Empire likewise engaged in a major conflict with Venice (it began over a dispute regarding economic privileges: in the coming centuries Byzantium would have much heartache on account of the Italian merchant republics).

By the early 1170’s Manuel’s career had peaked. He had only failed militarily in south Italy, but the situation in the east had grown dangerous. Left to their own devices for too long, the Seljuk Turks had grown in power, and Byzantium was obliged to address the issue.

Advancing into Anatolia, the emperor was defeated at the Battle of Myriokephalon, which effectively ended his strategic campaigning in Anatolia.

While not as militarily disastrous as Manzikert, it did mark an important shift as the inability to destroy the now consolidated Seljuk's meant that Byzantine attempts to reconquer all of Anatolia were effectively at an end.

In the fall of 1180 A.D. Manuel died, and unlike his slower, more cautious predecessors, he left the Empire poorer and in a less advantageous position than when he had inherited it. The situation he left his successors was a difficult one; one they would prove ill-equipped to meet.

Byzantium c.1180 A.D.

Manuel’s unimpressive successor Alexius II was quickly overthrown by the late emperor’s cousin Andronicus Komnenos.

Emperor Alexius II Komnenos

The new emperor had many worries, including usurpers in Cyprus, invaders from Hungary and Serbia, and plotters in the capital.

The real threat to his reign came from the Norman kingdom of Sicily. The Normans under their king William II the Good (ironically the son of William I the Bad), launched a massive invasion of the Empire, starting as Robert Guiscard had a century before on what is now the Albanian coast. King William II of Sicily

Unlike the previous invasion, there was no heroic resistance by the Byzantine forces, and the Normans quickly advanced east towards Thessalonica, the second city of the Empire. Due to incompetence on the part of its governor, the city fell, and was horrifically sacked by the Normans.

This event inspired mass panic in Constantinople, and a brutal crackdown ensued. Just before the mass execution of the city’s prisoners, the emperor’s relative Isaac Angelos escaped the men sent to kill him and led a successful uprising.

Andronicus was killed, and Isaac proclaimed emperor.

Assigning competent leaders to largely ineffective Byzantine armies and mustering all the reinforcements available, the imperials first defeated the Norman vanguard, and then crushed their main army. A shattered fragment of the Norman force survived to flee the Empire.

While this latest threat had been deflected, it was a serious warning of the increasingly powerful and covetous forces in Western Europe. The warning however was not properly heeded, and there would be unimaginable consequences.

Like many great dynasties, the Komnenoi, after long years of diligence and hard work, were beginning to show the results of long held power. Corruption and infighting became more common, and as the once unifying desire to put the good of the Empire before all else faded, Byzantium’s enemies drew near.

The Angelos dynasty ruled for only a few decades, but proved the most disastrous ruling family for the Empire, bar none.

Byzantium Under the Angeloi

Islands in the Adriatic were forever lost to the Normans, and the Bulgarians and Serbians ended Byzantine supremacy in the Balkans (which would never return).

The army and navy were demoralized while the Theme system which had been the basis of imperial defence for centuries effectively disintegrated.

If this were not enough, in late 1187 A.D. horrible news arrived: Jerusalem had fallen.

Under the leadership of the legendary Kurdish ruler Saladin, the Muslim force advanced against the stunted mediocrities ruling the crusader states.

The armies of Outremer marched to meet him under the leadership of Guy de Lusignan, who foolishly decided to confront Saladin in open battle and forfeited the home field advantage.

At the Battle of Hattin Guy’s army was crushed by Saladin, a result which would do much to seal the fate of the states of Outremer.

Facing not significant resistance, Saladin marched to and besieged Jerusalem.

After a spirited defence, the leader of Christians, Balian of Ibelin, negotiated the surrender of the city.

Unlike the brutal conquest of the city a century before, Saladin ensured order was maintained. Likewise, few Christians ended up in slavery, as all were given the opportunity to buy their redemption, and most of the poor were either redeemed by Christian authorities, or freed by Saladin himself.

For these actions as well as many others, Saladin achieved legendary status in both Islamic and Western civilization, standing in both as one of the highest examples of piety and chivalry.

Indeed, his heroic and noble nature have made him one of relatively few figures in history to transcend the cultural and historic context in which he lived, and achieve true immortality.

It was said that Pope Urban III died of shock upon hearing the news, and his successor Gregory VIII called a new crusade (the third).

Pope Urban III Pope Gregory VIII

This new crusade was to be led by, among others, the western emperor Frederick Barbarossa and King Richard the Lionheart of England.

King Richard the Lionheart Emperor Frederick Barbarossa

Like its predecessor, this crusade was ultimately a failure, albeit one for both sides. While Richard managed to help retake the city of Acre, which would serve as the capital of the Kingdom of Jerusalem until its final conquest a century later, the re-conquest of Jerusalem itself was unsuccessful.

Richard however did establish a friendly rivalry with Saladin, and the two were said to hold one another in high esteem, providing an oft cited example of mutual respect and chivalric conduct between foes.

Frederick Barbarossa had a distinctly less memorable crusade, drowning in an Anatolian river. Likewise, the German armies were unable to accomplish the recapture of Jerusalem, adding to the list of failed crusading efforts.

Barbarossa’s son, Henry VI of the Norman kingdom of Sicily, began agitating for a new crusade and demanded aid from Byzantium.

Henry VI, Holy Roman Emperor

In the meantime, Isaac was overthrown and blinded by his elder brother Alexius III, who proved even more incompetent than his predecessor. He gave in to Henry VI demands, and imposed ruinous measures upon the Empire to raise the required funds. However, this second German led expedition was just as unsuccessful as the first, making these sacrifices both arduous and in vain.

Emperor Alexius III

Europe at the dawn of the 13th century was in serious confusion, with both Empires lacking strong leadership, and various domestic issues plaguing much of Western Europe.

A new crusade was called to redeem the failures of its predecessors, which would ultimately go down as one of the vilest acts of barbarism in human history: The Fourth Crusade.

Gathering at Venice, it was discovered that the Crusaders lacked the funds to pay for the Venetian’s transport services. Fortunately for them, the son of the deposed emperor Isaac offered them funds and troops if they would restore him and his father to the throne.

This opportunity they quickly accepted, and in June of 1203 A.D. they dropped anchor off Constantinople.

Having made no preparations, Alexius III fled with women and gold, and not much concern for the people he left behind.

Now that Isaac and his son were in power again, they began scraping together the funds required to pay the exorbitant fees incurred by this coup. Eventually the two were killed and replaced by a new ruler not beholden to the crusading rabble.

This proved unfortunate, for the Venetians had been trying to convince their allies to seize the city in its entirety, and now with the prospect of not being paid the crusaders were more apt to listen. In April of 1204 A.D. the assault began, and after a short siege the city was taken.

The Empire was divided up like so much pie: one quarter going to the puppet emperor of the new so called Latin Empire, and three-eighths each to the Crusaders and to Venice.

This was not the end of Byzantium however: In Nicaea, Trebizond, and Epirus successor states under the rule of Byzantine nobles immediately arose and began to contest this invasion.

It is difficult here to express the magnitude of the loss inflicted by the fourth crusade, but it would not be an exaggeration to call the act of sacking Constantinople one of the worst ever losses to humanity’s collective cultural history.

Sufficed to say, this was unquestionably the worst disaster ever to befall Byzantium, perhaps save only for the final fall of the Empire.

As such, the Doge of Venice Enrico Dandolo, and the republic of Venice in general, must bear this terrible burden under history’s gaze and humanity’s judgement.