I know that the general understanding of the Post-1204 Empire was one of decline and eventual fall in 1453, but from what I've read the Empire (under the Nicaea Faction) from 1204-1282 seemed perfectly capable of not just holding its own against her enemies in both east and west, but also pushing back against the tide of history and reconquering territory in Europe, even reconquering Constantinople from the Latins in 1261. I would argue that the Empire from 1204-1282 doesn't sound like an Empire in decline, but an Empire recovering from the 4th Crusade. You don't go from only holding territories in Anatolia to holding substantial lands in Europe to then being crowned Emperor in Constantinople if your state is in decline.
I would also argue that the decline didn't really begin to set in until after 1282, during Andronikos II's reign, due to the policies of Michael VIII, and that the fall of the Empire, short of outside intervention, became inevitable following the 2nd Palaiologoi Civil War in the 1340s.
Of course, that's just one man's opinion. What do y'all think?
I would also argue that the decline didn't really begin to set in until after 1282, during Andronikos II's reign, due to the policies of Michael VIII, and that the fall of the Empire, short of outside intervention, became inevitable following the 2nd Palaiologoi Civil War in the 1340s.
Of course, that's just one man's opinion. What do y'all think?