Talk:Treaty of Nymphaeum (1214)

Criticism

Although Ostrogorsky is, by any measure, a reliable source on Byzantine history, his opinions on the Treaty of Nymphaeum are obsolete. Since he published his book, it has been determined that David Komnenos died in 1212, about 2 years before the treaty was signed. So it's not surprising he wasn't mentioned in the treaty. Further, the westernmost portions of the Empire of Trebizond had been overrun in previous years by both the Nicaean Empire & the Seljuks: there is evidence that Theodore Laskaris began his conquests of Paphlogonia as early as 1211 & concluded them in October of 1214, while the Seljuk conquest of Sinope concluded with the city's surrender 1 November 1214, immediately prior to the signing of this treaty.

The absence of any mention of Trebizond or Alexios is important in one way: it is proof that this early rival of Theodore Laskaris & the Nicaeans were now clearly out of the race for the recovery of Constantinople. Had either party to this treaty thought they might be in some significant manner, Trebizond would have been mentioned in some way.

But the article would be greatly improved by investigating the motivations & expectations for Henry of Flanders to sign this treaty: was he hoping to benefit from the conquest of Paphlagonia by his rival Greek & Seljuk neighbors? Or was he agreeing to the treaty to limit potential danger to his realm? Or perhaps both parties were motivated by events beyond the immediate territories of Asia Minor? (The reader might be able to begin her/his own research towards an answer if there was a summary of the treaty -- if the text exists. -- llywrch (talk) 16:14, 20 May 2014 (UTC)