Do you think that between 720 and 1070 AD, any Byzantine Emperor was realistically capable of making a blunder along the lines of Manzikert in 1071?

[WolfBear]

Do you think that between 720 and 1070 AD, any Byzantine Emperor was realistically capable of making a blunder along the lines of Manzikert in 1071? I'm asking about this because these 350 years (720-1070) were a rather good period for the Byzantine Empire, when it underwent a significant territorial recovery after previously losing a lot of its territories to the Muslims. The 1071 Battle of Manzikert was, of course, a huge shock because it paved the way for the conquest of almost all of Anatolia by the Seljuk Turks within the next ten years and thus eventually paved the way for the First Crusade (and, of course, for the subsequent Crusades after that one). In turn, this makes me wonder if, had things went a bit differently, the Byzantine Empire could have experienced a comparable crisis point earlier, specifically sometime between the 720 and 1070 AD time period.

Anyway, what do you think about this?

 

[History Learner]

Technically it did happen, what with the Slavs becoming fully established in the Balkans.

 

[WolfBear]

Technically it did happen, what with the Slavs becoming fully established in the Balkans.

That happened before 720, no? Here's a map of the Byzantine Empire in 717:

 

[History Learner]

That happened before 720, no? Here's a map of the Byzantine Empire in 717:

The conquests became permanent and Bulgarian due to the failures of Constantine V in the 700s.

 

[WolfBear]

The conquests became permanent and Bulgarian due to the failures of Constantine V in the 700s.

But Basil II the Bulgar Slayer subsequently conquered the Bulgars, no?

 

[History Learner]

But Basil II the Bulgar Slayer subsequently conquered the Bulgars, no?

Yes, but much of the Balkans had become Bulgarian, which enabled Bulgaria to re-emerge later on. Had Constantine V been successful, it's likely the old status quo would've remained; Greek majority, both demographically and by assimilation.

 

[WolfBear]

Yes, but much of the Balkans had become Bulgarian, which enabled Bulgaria to re-emerge later on.

What was the demographic composition of the Balkans before the late 600s? Greek-speaking?

And Yeah, it's quite interesting: The Byzantines aimed to integrate their various subject peoples and to give all of them a Roman identity. The 2019 book Romanland provides a lot of details about this. You can find it for free online with its full text on LibGen.

And Yep, you are correct that the Byzantines failed to permanently make the Bulgarians a part of their body politic. As soon as the Bulgarians smelled Byzantine weakness, they once again rebelled against the Byzantines. I suppose similar to the Ukrainians in 1991, only much more violently.