曼努埃爾被希臘人譽為大帝，因為人們願意向其效忠而聲名遠播。在其大臣約翰·金納莫斯的歷史作品裡，曼努埃爾不僅是一代英傑，也是美德的典範。十字軍諸國在與曼努埃爾的聯繫中也受到他影響，他在西方天主教世界一些地區享有「最受上帝祝福的君士坦丁堡皇帝」（the most blessed emperor of Constantinople）稱號。[1] 然而，現代歷史學家卻對他缺乏熱情。他們中的一些人認為，曼努埃爾所掌握的強權並非完全是他個人成就，而是來源於科穆寧王朝的強盛。此外，曼努埃爾去世後，帝國的國力嚴重衰退，與其統治期間的一些問題不無關聯。[2]
約翰二世之死與曼努埃爾一世的即位，13世紀推爾的威廉歷史手稿。現藏於法國國家圖書館。
曼努埃爾·科穆寧是約翰二世與皇后匈牙利的伊琳娜第四子(幼子)，所以他似乎不可能繼承皇位。他的外祖父是匈牙利國王聖拉斯洛一世。因為曼努埃爾在他父親對抗塞爾柱突厥人的戰爭中表現卓越，亦或是其它原因，所以1143年他被臨終的約翰二世選為繼承人，而不是他脾氣易怒的兄長伊薩克·科穆寧。1143年4月8日約翰二世去世後，曼努埃爾被軍隊擁立為皇帝。[3]然而曼努埃爾的繼位並非四平八穩，他的父親死在遠離君士坦丁堡的奇里乞亞荒野，他認為應該儘快返回首都。但他仍然要處理好他父親的葬禮，還要按照傳統在他父親去世的地方組織建立一座修道院。他立即派父親的摯友，大統領約翰·阿克蘇赫（英語：John Axouch）在他之前前往首都，去逮捕他最危險的潛在競爭對手——他的兄長伊薩克，因為伊薩克正居住在大皇宮，並且可以立即掌控皇帝登基的禮服與大量財富。阿克蘇赫在皇帝去世的消息傳到首都之前便抵達，他迅速確保首都對曼努埃爾的忠誠，曼努埃爾於1143年8月進入首都。之後他被新任命的宗主教米海爾二世（英語：Michael II of Constantinople）所加冕。幾天後，在確保皇位不會有更多的威脅後，曼努埃爾下令釋放伊薩克。[4]然後他下令贈予君士坦丁堡每一位戶主兩個金幣，並且為教會捐贈200磅黃金（包括每年捐贈200枚銀幣）。[5]
曼努埃爾採取有力方式來回應他對此事的憤怒。1158-1159年冬，他在他的龐大軍隊到達之前來到奇里乞亞；他急速推進（曼努埃爾只率領500騎兵在主力部隊的前方急速行軍）是為驚嚇奇里乞亞亞美尼亞王國的索羅斯二世（英語：Thoros II, Prince of Armenia），他們曾經參與十字軍對賽普勒斯的入侵。[20]索羅斯聞後，遂遁入群山之中，奇里乞亞便迅速落入曼努埃爾之手。[21]
羅傑二世於1154年去世後，由威廉一世繼位，他將面對西西里和阿普利亞大批反對他統治的叛亂者，這也導致許多的阿普利亞難民投靠到拜占廷一方。康拉德三世的繼任者，腓特烈一世發動一系列對抗諾曼人的戰役，但他的遠征卻停滯不前。但這些動態鼓勵曼努埃爾趁機利用義大利半島上的動盪局勢。[26]1155年，他派出兩位獲得「至尊者（英語：Sebastos）」頭銜的米海爾·帕列奧略（英語：Michael Palaiologos (general)）和約翰·杜卡斯二位將軍，率領拜占廷軍隊以及十艘船隻並攜帶大量的黃金去入侵阿普利亞。[27]二位將軍被指示去謀求腓特烈的援助，但腓特烈卻因為他的軍隊翻越阿爾卑斯山後士氣低落而拒絕。然而，在當地貴族（包括Loritello的伯爵羅伯特三世（英語：Robert III of Loritello））的幫助下，曼努埃爾的遠征軍很快便在整個南義大利取得驚人成績，還聚集大批反對西西里王室以及威廉一世的叛亂者。[14]在武力的逼迫和金錢的誘惑下，許多的城堡放棄抵抗，遠征軍們取得輝煌的勝利。[23]
控制埃及是耶路撒冷王國幾十年來的夢想，並且耶路撒冷國王阿馬爾里克一世對埃及軍事干預的政策，需要軍事和財政上的全力援助。[48]阿馬爾里克也知道如果他想追求控制埃及的夢想，他可能不得不離開安條克，尋求花費十萬第納爾去為博希蒙德三世贖身的曼努埃爾援助。[49][50]1159年，曼努埃爾的第一任皇后蘇爾茨巴赫的貝莎（英語：Bertha of Sulzbach）去世；1161年，曼努埃爾和阿瑪爾里克的表親安條克的瑪麗成婚。1165年，他派使者到君士坦丁堡的宮廷中向皇帝提出婚約。[51]1167年，在長達兩年的等待之後，阿瑪爾里克迎娶曼努埃爾侄孫女瑪利亞·科穆寧娜（英語：Maria Komnene, Queen of Jerusalem），並且「他立下和他的哥哥鮑德溫一樣的誓約」。[f]兩國正式結盟於1168年，兩國的領袖也為共同占領和瓜分埃及做好安排，曼努埃爾將會取得埃及沿海地區，阿馬爾里克則取得內陸。1169年秋，曼努埃爾派遣一支遠征軍同阿馬爾里克共同入侵埃及：一支拜占庭軍隊與一支由20艘大型戰艦、150艘戰艦以及60艘運輸船組成的艦隊在拜占廷海軍大將軍安德洛尼卡·康多提斯法諾斯的指揮下在阿什凱隆同阿馬爾里克會師。[51][52]在推爾的威廉記載中，聯軍中用於運輸騎兵的巨大運輸船給他非常留下深刻印象。[53]
十年後，又一場論戰因基督所說「我的父親比我更偉大」而展開，這是屬於他的神性，還是他的人性，又或是兩者的聯合？[72]蘭佩的德米特里厄斯，一位剛剛從西方返回的拜占庭外交官，嘲諷西歐那裡對神學的理解，他們認為基督在人性上高於他的父親，但卻在神性上低於他。另一方面，曼努埃爾察覺到這或許是一個推動東西教會聯合的一個契機，他找到一個合情合理的方案，並在1166年3月2日所舉辦的宗教會議上得到多數支持並將此問題解決，在會議上他得到君士坦丁堡普世宗主教魯喀（英語：Luke Chrysoberges）和未來的宗主教米海爾三世（英語：Michael III of Constantinople）支持。[73]那些拒絕順從宗教會議研究決定的教士要麼財產被充公，要麼則被流放。[g]從政治層面上，這場論戰反映主要對皇帝教旨持反對意見的人是他外甥阿歷克塞·康多提斯法諾斯。[74]
1180年曼努埃爾去世時的拜占庭帝國表面上依然強大，他在去世前不久，還舉辦他兒子阿歷克塞二世與法國國王路易七世的女兒阿格尼斯（英語：Agnes of France (Byzantine empress)）的訂婚慶典。[97]歸功於阿歷克塞一世、約翰二世和曼努埃爾一世在外交和軍事上的努力，此時的帝國國力才會如此強大，經濟上是如此的繁榮，邊疆是如此的穩定；但盛世背後也存在嚴重的問題。在內部，拜占庭皇室中需要一位強有力的領袖去使他們團結起來，越來越多挑戰來自於日益膨脹的皇室內部，但曼努埃爾的去世大大危害帝國內部穩定性。帝國的一些外敵潛伏在側翼，等待進攻的時機，尤其是安納托利亞的突厥人——曼努埃爾最終也沒能徹底擊敗的敵人，還有諾曼西西里人——他們已經多次入侵帝國，但最終以失敗告終。甚至還有威尼斯人，拜占庭最重要的西方盟友，在1180年曼努埃爾去世時，與帝國關係惡劣。鑑於這種情況，帝國需要一位強大帝王來確保能夠對抗面臨的外敵威脅，之後重建帝國枯竭的國庫。但曼努埃爾的兒子還未成年，並且他不受歡迎的攝政政府最終被一場政變所推翻。拜占庭國家實力正是依賴於王朝的團結與穩固，而這一動盪的繼承削弱這一點，好戰鄰國們和野心勃勃臣屬們看到他們的機會。[97]
注釋
^a: The mood that prevailed before the end of 1147 is best conveyed by a verse enconium to Manuel (one of the poems included in a list transmitted under the name of Theodore Prodromos in Codex Marcianus graecus XI.22 known as Manganeios Prodromos), which was probably an imperial commission, and must have been written shortly after the Germans had crossed the Bosporus. Here Conrad is accused of wanting to take Constantinople by force, and to install a Latin patriarch (Manganeios Prodromos, no 20.1).[98]
^b: According to Paul Magdalino, one of Manuel's primary goals was a partition of Italy with the German empire, in which Byzantium would get the Adriatic coast. His unilateral pursuit, however, antagonized the new German emperor, Frederick Barbarossa, whose own plans for imperial restoration ruled out any partnership with Byzantium. Manuel was thus obliged to treat Frederick as his main enemy, and to form a web of relationships with other western powers, including the papacy, his old enemy, the Norman kingdom, Hungary, several magnates and cities throughout Italy, and, above all, the crusader states.[97]
^c: Magdalino underscores that, whereas John had removed the Rupenid princes from power in Cilicia twenty years earlier, Manuel allowed Toros to hold most of his strongholds he had taken, and effectively restored only the coastal area to imperial rule. From Raynald, Manuel secured recognition of imperial suzerainty over Antioch, with the promise to hand over the citadel, to instal a patriarch sent from Constantinople (not actually implemented until 1165–66), and to provide troops for the emperor's service, but nothing seems to have been said about the reversion of Antioch to direct imperial rule. According to Magdalino, this suggests that Manuel had dropped this demand on which both his grandfather and father insisted.[20] For his part, Medieval historian Zachary Nugent Brooke believes that the victory of Christianity against Nur ad-Din was made impossible, since both Greeks and Latins were concerned primarily with their own interests. He characterises the policy of Manuel as "short-sighted", because "he lost a splendid opportunity of recovering the former possessions of the Empire, and by his departure threw away most of the actual fruits of his expedition".[99] According to Piers Paul Read, Manuel's deal with Nur ad-Din was for the Latins another expression of Greeks' perfidy.[17]
^d: Alexios had been ordered to bring soldiers, but he merely brought his empty ships to Brindisi.[31]
^e: In 1155 Hadrian sent legates to Manuel, with a letter for Basil, Archbishop of Thessaloniki, in which he exhorted that bishop to procure the reünion of the churches. Basil answered that there was no division between the Greeks and Latins, since they held the same faith and offered the same sacrifice. "As for the causes of scandal, weak in themselves, that have separated us from each other", he added, "your Holiness can cause them to cease, by your own extended authority and the help of the Emperor of the West."[100]
^f: This probably meant that Amalric repeated Baldwin's assurances regarding the status of Antioch as an imperial fief.[51]
^g: According to Michael Angold, after the controversy of 1166 Manuel took his responsibilities very seriously, and tightened his grip over the church. 1166 was also the year in which Manuel first referred in his legislation to his role as the disciplinarian of the church (epistemonarkhes).[101]
Jeffreys, Elizabeth; Jeffreys, Michael (2015) "A Constantinopolitan Poet Views Frankish Antioch". In: Chrissis, Nikolaos G.; Kedar, Benjamin Z.; Phillips, Jonathan (eds.) Crusades, Ashgate, ISBN 978-1-472-46841-3, vol. 14, p. 53
Z. N. Brooke, A History of Europe, from 911 to 1198, 482 * P. Magdalino, The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos, 67 * J. H. Norwich, A short history of Byzantium
M. Angold, Church and Society under the Komneni, 99
一手資料
Nicetas Choniates, , O City of Byzantium, Annals of Niketas Choniates. Trans. Harry J. Magoulias. Wayne State University Press, 1984.
John Cinnamus, Deeds of John and Manuel Comnenus, trans. Charles M. Brand. Columbia University Press, 1976.
Komnene (Comnena), Anna; Edgar Robert Ashton Sewter. XLVIII-The First Crusade. The Alexiad of Anna Comnena translated by Edgar Robert Ashton Sewter. Penguin Classics. 1969. ISBN 0-14-044215-4.
William of Tyre, Historia Rerum In Partibus Transmarinis Gestarum (A History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea), translated by E. A. Babock and A. C. Krey (Columbia University Press, 1943). See the original text in the Latin library.
Angold, Michael. Church and Politics under Manuel I Komnenos. Church and Society in Byzantium Under the Comneni, 1081–1261. Cambridge University Press. 1995. ISBN 0-521-26432-4.
Birkenmeier, John W. The Campaigns of Manuel I Komnenos. The Development of the Komnenian Army: 1081–1180. Brill Academic Publishers. 2002. ISBN 90-04-11710-5.
Bradbury, Jim. Military events. The Routledge Companion to Medieval Warfare. Read Country Books. 2006. ISBN 1-84664-983-8.
Brand, Charles M. The Turkish Element in Byzantium, Eleventh-Twelfth Centuries. Dumbarton Oaks Papers (Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University). 1989, 43: 1–25. JSTOR 1291603. doi:10.2307/1291603.
Duggan, Anne J. The Pope and the Princes. Adrian IV, the English Pope, 1154–1159: Studies and Texts edited by Brenda Bolton and Anne J. Duggan. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. 2003. ISBN 0-7546-0708-9.
Gibbon, Edward. XLVIII-The Decline and Fall. The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (Volume III). Penguin Classics. 1995. ISBN 0-14-043395-3.
Hamilton, Bernard. William of Tyre and the Byzantine Empire. Porphyrogenita: : Essays on the History and Literature of Byzantium and the Latin East in Honor of Julian Chrysostomides, edited by Charalambos Dendrinos, Jonathan Harris, Eirene Harvalia-Crook and Judith Herrin. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. 2003. ISBN 0-7546-3696-8.
Hanson, Graig L. Manuel I Komnenos and the "God of Muhammad": A Study in Byzantine Ecclesiastical Politics. Medieval Christian Perceptions of Islam: A Book of Essays edited by John Tolan. Routledge. 2003. ISBN 0-415-92892-3.
Harris, Jonathan, Byzantium and the Crusades, Bloomsbury, 2nd ed., 2014. ISBN 978-1-78093-767-0
Harris, Jonathan and Tolstoy, Dmitri, 'Alexander III and Byzantium', in Alexander III (1159-81: The Art of Survival, ed. P. Clarke and A. Duggan, Ashgate, 2012, pp. 301–13. ISBN 978 07546 6288 4
Hillenbrand, Carole. The Imprisonment of Raynald of Châtillon. Texts, Documents, and Artefacts: Islamic Studies in Honour of D. S. (Donald Sidney) Richards edited by Chase F. Robinson. Brill Academic Publishers. 2003. ISBN 90-04-10865-3.
Každan, Alexander P.; Epstein, Ann Wharton. Popular and Aristrocratic Popular Trends. Change in Byzantine Culture in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries. University of California Press. 1990. ISBN 0-520-06962-5.
MacGillivray Nicol, Donald. The Parting of the Ways. Byzantium and Venice: A Study in Diplomatic and Cultural Relations. Cambridge University Press. 1988. ISBN 0-521-42894-7.
Magdalino, Paul. The Byzantine Empire (1118–1204). The New Cambridge Medieval History edited by Rosamond McKitterick, Timothy Reuter, Michael K. Jones, Christopher Allmand, David Abulafia, Jonathan Riley-Smith, Paul Fouracre, David Luscombe. Cambridge University Press. 2005. ISBN 0-521-41411-3.
Magdalino, Paul. The Medieval Empire (780–1204). The Oxford History of Byzantium By Cyril A. Mango. Oxford University Press. 2002. ISBN 0-19-814098-3.
Mayer, Hans, Eberhard. The Latin East, 1098–1205. The New Cambridge Medieval History edited by Rosamond McKitterick, Timothy Reuter, Michael K. Jones, Christopher Allmand, David Abulafia, Jonathan Riley-Smith, Paul Fouracre, David Luscombe. Cambridge University Press. 2005. ISBN 0-521-41411-3.
Obolensky, Dimitri. The Byzantine Commonwealth: Eastern Europe 500–1453. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. 1971. ISBN 1-84212-019-0.
Paparrigopoulos, Constantine; Karolidis, Pavlos. History of the Hellenic Nation Db. Athens: Eleftheroudakis. 1925 （希臘語）..
Read, Piers Paul. The Templars (translated in Greek by G. Kousounelou). Enalios. 2003 [1999]. ISBN 960-536-143-4.
Rogers, Clifford J. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Medieval Warfare and Military Technology: Vol. 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2010. ISBN 978-0195334036.
Varzos, Konstantinos. Η Γενεαλογία των Κομνηνών [The Genealogy of the Komnenoi]. Thessaloniki: Byzantine Research Centre. 1984 （希臘語）., Vols. A1, A2 & B
