1493 Jerusalem Discussion

[Glen]

Okay, the whole disposition and handling of Jerusalem is an issue.

1) Would the Knights of Rhodes, Naples, and Spain ally with Ottoman to take it?

2) Would the Christians keep it?

3) Would the Ottomans let them?

This has huge implications for the timeline, and we need to agree on it, even if the nations involved in the timeline don't.

Comments?

[The Sicilian]

The Neapolitans have actual control over the KOJ, both militarily and politicaly.

[Keenir]

Okay, the whole disposition and handling of Jerusalem is an issue.

1) Would the Knights of Rhodes, Naples, and Spain ally with Ottoman to take it?

DAubusson convinced Naples and Spain to help the Ottomans take it.

2) Would the Christians keep it?

you and Abdul have reminded me that they wouldn't keep it.

with the expulsion of the soldiers of Naples, the area doesn't become majority Catholic....and the Orthodox residents likely wouldn't let them stay.

3) Would the Ottomans let them?

once the City was taken from the Mamluks, the Ottomans would 'ask' the Naples troops to leave. (injured troops would be cared for, likely by the Knights, but even the injured (once healed) would eventually have to leave as well)

Comments?

wouldn't Naples consider this simply "proof of Mahammodean perfidity," and take their frustrations out on the Knights, who convinced Naples to side with them?

The Neapolitans have actual control over the KOJ, both militarily and politicaly.

"politically"? :confused:

[The Sicilian]

DAubusson convinced Naples and Spain to help the Ottomans take it.Nope, DAubusson asked Naples and Spain to help him take it, while the Ottomans and Mamelukes were distracted with beating eachother up. While that cat's away the mice will play sort of thing.:D
you and Abdul have reminded me that they wouldn't keep it.Why exactly is that? We are the ones who conquered it. :confused::confused:

with the expulsion of the soldiers of Naples, the area doesn't become majority Catholic....and the Orthodox residents likely wouldn't let them stay.What expulsion? Where was this written? I certainly did not say so. IIRC there are lots of Catholics moving in, Knights, Italians, Maronites.
Is the Eastern Orthodox population large enough to expel an occupying military force?
once the City was taken from the Mamluks, the Ottomans would 'ask' the Naples troops to leave. (injured troops would be cared for, likely by the Knights, but even the injured (once healed) would eventually have to leave as well) The City was taken from the Mamelukes by Crusaders, not Ottomans. They Ottomans have no authority over who stays and who goes, the Christians do. And why would Naples withdrawl their troops on a crusade???
"Ohh guys, the infidels are asking us to go back home and leave the Holy Land to them. I guess we should"

wouldn't Naples consider this simply "proof of Mahammodean perfidity," and take their frustrations out on the Knights, who convinced Naples to side with them?Not sure why Naples would attack their allies because some Turks started acting all upity.

"politically"? :confused:As in we control the government.:D:cool:

Hope that brings some clarification. :)

[Keenir]

here's a thought: let's just eliminate the Mamluk War altogether. how's that sound?

Nope, DAubusson asked Naples and Spain to help him take it, while the Ottomans and Mamelukes were distracted with beating eachother up. While that cat's away the mice will play sort of thing.

look, if you want an Ottoman-Naples war, just say so!

Why exactly is that? We are the ones who conquered it. :confused::confused:

and the Sublime Porte greatly appreciates your effort. he's said a prayer for your heathen souls.
:cool:

What expulsion? Where was this written?

don't worry...its understandable that you missed it, given how many threads we have dedicated to revising events. ;)

I certainly did not say so. IIRC there are lots of Catholics moving in, Knights, Italians, Maronites.

you're like hte Palestinians: you can want to move in all you want, but there's going to be an army keeping you from doing so.

and hte Marionites haven't left Lebanon.

Is the Eastern Orthodox population large enough to expel an occupying military force?

the Ottoman Army is.

The City was taken from the Mamelukes by Crusaders, not Ottomans. They Ottomans have no authority over who stays and who goes, the Christians do. And why would Naples withdrawl their troops on a crusade???

As in we control the government.:D:cool:

at the tolerance of the Ottomans - a fact the King of Naples aggreed to, saying that if he displeases the Porte, he knows he'd be kicked out.

[Keenir]

expulsion? Where was this written? I certainly did not say so. IIRC there are lots of Catholics moving in, Knights, Italians, Maronites.

how did they sail through the Ottoman navy? (which was mentioned in the original version of hte original thread - the navy was off the coast of Jerusalem, blockading it from resupplying)

[The Sicilian]

here's a thought: let's just eliminate the Mamluk War altogether. how's that sound? Sounds like a total bitch to retcon. I don't want to do it as there is nothing hugely wrong with the War as it is. But if Glen. AJ, and Ramiero agree with you, then I won't dispute it.
look, if you want an Ottoman-Naples war, just say so! That is the exact opposite of what I wish for. I am just defending Naples' interests. This is discussion, not a battle.
and the Sublime Porte greatly appreciates your effort. he's said a prayer for your heathen souls.
Uh, good for him. We still control Jerusalem.

you're like hte Palestinians: you can want to move in all you want, but there's going to be an army keeping you from doing so.Nope, the Mameluke army has allready been destroyed in that region (by the Rhodeans and Spaniards). The army is basically to back up the Neapolitan claim.
and hte Marionites haven't left Lebanon. Yes they have. Talk to AJ.

at the tolerance of the Ottomans - a fact the King of Naples aggreed to, saying that if he displeases the Porte, he knows he'd be kicked out.
You're wrong there Keenir. What I agrred to was specifically:
1: Support the Sultans military endevours against not Christian, non Sunni targets in a limited area (from Damascus to the Nile Delta)
2: Enter a royal marriage, whith the daughter of the Ottoman Vizier marrying Prince Alphonso.
3: Protect the shrines of the Jews, Christians and Muslims from any Persian agression.

If I said any differently then I misspoke.

[The Sicilian]

how did they sail through the Ottoman navy? (which was mentioned in the original version of hte original thread - the navy was off the coast of Jerusalem, blockading it from resupplying)
They were blockading the Mamelukes, I imagine. Not the Chrstians.

[Keenir]

They were blockading the Mamelukes, I imagine. Not the Chrstians.

the navy isn't enemy-specific, thankfully. :);):D:cool:

[Keenir]

Sounds like a total bitch to retcon.

as I see it, that would actually simplify things.

Nope, the Mameluke army has allready been destroyed in that region (by the Rhodeans and Spaniards). The arm is basically to back up the Neapolitan claim.

the Mamluk army has, yes; the Ottoman one, hasn't.

Yes they have. Talk to AJ.

they left Lebanon after the establishment of the Kingdom of Jerusalem. if the Kingdom is not established, they don't leave Lebanon.

[The Sicilian]

the navy isn't enemy-specific, thankfully. :);):D:cool:
Thankfully? You mean it would be beneficial to the Ottomans cause for them to indescriminatly attack ships, no matter who was sailing them?!

[Keenir]

Thankfully? You mean it would be beneficial to the Ottomans cause for them to indescriminatly attack ships, no matter who was sailing them?!

now you're deliberately misinterpretting (so it seems)....I meant that a navy which is positioned to defend against Mamluk ships, can also be used against ships from Naples.

[The Sicilian]

as I see it, that would actually simplify things.
No, as we would have to rewrite all events concerning Rhodes, OE, Mamelukes, Naples, Spain and the Alodi, as that war pretty much defined the geopolitical outlook of all powers involved. And like Glen said earlier, this timeline has no Italian wars, which has been replaced with the Mameluke Crusade.

the Mamluk army has, yes; the Ottoman one, hasn't.
Please, stop beating around the bush.

Are you saying that during a mutually devastating war between the Ottomans and Mamelukes, the Ottomans attacked their only allies in the region for absolutly no reason? Because, from what I've read, that is where you seem to be going with this.

they left Lebanon after the establishment of the Kingdom of Jerusalem. if the Kingdom is not established, they don't leave Lebanon.
At what damn point did the KoJ vanish from existence?! When/where was this decided on? Why was I not informed?

[The Sicilian]

now you're deliberately misinterpretting (so it seems)....I meant that a navy which is positioned to defend against Mamluk ships, can also be used against ships from Naples.
I'm sorry if I misinterpreted but why would they attack their allies?

[Keenir]

No, as we would have to rewrite all events concerning Rhodes, OE, Mamelukes, Naples, Spain and the Alodi, as that war pretty much defined the geopolitical outlook of all powers involved. And like Glen said earlier, this timeline has no Italian wars, which has been replaced with the Mameluke Crusade.

well, better to do it now, than after we type up another thirty years.

(to be fair, we should've had this sort of a review once the decade was complete, rather than letting it sit untended)

Are you saying that during a mutually devastating war between the Ottomans and Mamelukes, the Ottomans attacked their only allies in the region for absolutly no reason?

after the war was over, the Ottomans moved to defend the conquered lands from the army of Naples. DAubusson said that the Knights and Naples and Spain would want only the chance to polish their fighting credentials.

At what damn point did the KoJ vanish from existence?! When/where was this decided on? Why was I not informed?

Glen's been arguing against its existance almost from day one....and Abdul gave a persuasive explanation why the Ottomans wouldn't enter into such a bargain.

I'm sorry, but with no floor beneath it, a table cannot stand.

[Keenir]

I'm sorry if I misinterpreted

no worries.

but why would they attack their allies?

not attack their allies -- but be on the defensive in case said allies tried to sneak something....like their dealings with France in OTL.

[The Sicilian]

no worries.



not attack their allies -- but be on the defensive in case said allies tried to sneak something....like their dealings with France in OTL.
Okay, that's AJ's territory so I'll shut up when it comes to that.

I say we put our shouting match on hold, until Glen can reach a workable solution.

EDIT: Exept the below post. I'm sorry.

[The Sicilian]

well, better to do it now, than after we type up another thirty years.

(to be fair, we should've had this sort of a review once the decade was complete, rather than letting it sit untended)
Glen can decide wether the history of the Mediterranean should be rewritten IATL. My personal, unqualified and noobish opinion is that we should not.

after the war was over, the Ottomans moved to defend the conquered lands from the army of Naples. DAubusson said that the Knights and Naples and Spain would want only the chance to polish their fighting credentials.
Yes. You wrote that today, in the retro thread. That is what I am disputing, as it reaaally fucks up the history that we've written so far.

Glen's been arguing against its existance almost from day one....and Abdul gave a persuasive explanation why the Ottomans wouldn't enter into such a bargain.
I wasn't aware of that until you brought it to my attention. Personally I found his reaction to be that he thought it was fine. Not to be repetitious, but when/where did Glen start arguing?

And if you don't mind, what is exactly Abdul's argument?

[Keenir]

AJ's territory.

hm, given DAubusson's role in all this, maybe we should jointly poison DAubusson.
;):D

I say we put our shouting match on hold, until Glen can reach a workable solution.

sounds good - I agree.

EDIT: Exept the below post. I'm sorry.

*doesn't read the below post*

apology accepted regardless.

[Glen]

DAubusson convinced Naples and Spain to help the Ottomans take it.

An extraordinary man, D'Aubusson, but this bit from wikipedia about his later life is informative:

"The remaining years of his life d'Aubusson spent attempting to restore discipline and zeal in his Order and to organize a grand crusade against the Turks. The age of the Renaissance, with Rodrigo Borgia on the throne of St. Peter, was, however, not favourable to such an enterprise.

The death of Cem in 1495 had removed the most formidable weapon available against the Sultan. And when in 1501 d'Aubusson led an expedition against Mytilene, dissension among his motley host rendered this enterprise wholly abortive. His last years were embittered by chagrin at his failure, which was hardly compensated by his success in extirpating Judaism in Rhodes, by expelling all adult Jews and forcibly baptizing their children."

So what has changed here realistically to make him an ally of the Sublime Porte as opposed to an adversary (not that he didn't cooperate with them IOTL when it suited his purposes)?

I suppose in one sense it makes sense for him to enlist Naples in such a venture given their claim (though not the sole one) to the Kingdom of Jerusalem. And given that we are positing an even warmer relation between Spain and Naples ITTL than before (really, we ought to kill off Isabella earlier so Ferdinand supporting his natural grandson is even less fettered), it makes some sense that they would receive aid from Spain.

So...in retrospect, the most questionable part is the Ottomans accepting help from the Rhodeans, and especially from Naples as it would be giving an 'in' to someone who has a rival claim. Even with an oath of fealty, that one is iffy....and lastly, does Beyazid really need the help, or just the opportunity, to defeat the Mameluks.

One thought though does come to mind....if the King of Naples were to accept being under the rule of the Ottoman Turk in his role of King of Jerusalem....it might be worth it to both sides to enter into such an agreement to undercut all the other claims out there....though those claiming it aren't in a real position to act upon that claim in the Levant, so that is a rather weak argument.....might want to float this past Abdul and Leo though.

you and Abdul have reminded me that they wouldn't keep it.

with the expulsion of the soldiers of Naples, the area doesn't become majority Catholic....and the Orthodox residents likely wouldn't let them stay.

once the City was taken from the Mamluks, the Ottomans would 'ask' the Naples troops to leave. (injured troops would be cared for, likely by the Knights, but even the injured (once healed) would eventually have to leave as well)[/QUOTE]

If you rely on them to take the region, what makes you think you can deny it to them so easily?:confused: Sounds like a second war following the first.

And what will the Mamelukes do in that case?:eek:

wouldn't Naples consider this simply "proof of Mahammodean perfidity," and take their frustrations out on the Knights, who convinced Naples to side with them?

Maybe, at least chill relations one suspects.

"politically"? :confused:

He's not going to let go of the city if he's there, is what he's saying. And both the Ottoman trying to keep him out, and him trying to keep it tighter are both reasonable possibilities here.

[Glen]

as I see it, that would actually simplify things.

It would simplify things.

[Glen]

While I thought that the alliance and subsequent KoJ bit was low probability, I thought you guys might pull it off with the proper subsequent events (namely, an attempted slick deal that starts causing trouble quickly).

I kept hearing that d'Aubusson had some sort of behind the scenes deal to make all this work, but as events unfold, it seemed that there wasn't enough there to further justify and firm up events.

[Keenir]

While I thought that the alliance and subsequent KoJ bit was low probability, I thought you guys might pull it off with the proper subsequent events (namely, an attempted slick deal that starts causing trouble quickly).

if we do this (keep the Mamluk War, but the allies start infighting before the dust can settle much), then we might have an earlier start to the Portugese War, as the Portugese are the only forces who are strong enough (and postitioned best) to help the Ottomans.

whether we do that, or cancel the Mamluk War entirely (or just remove the Ottomans from the equation), I don't care....but I'll go along with whatever the rest of you can agree upon.

[The Sicilian]

It would simplify things.
Here's where I disagree. The Mameluke war was one of the big events in the begining of the timeline. Removing it is going to cause a butterfly effect that really skews a lot of things.

I'll admit that the War needs some tweaking, especially the relationship between the Ottomans and Crusaders. But erasing it and retconing events for all of the nations involved (and some that were not e.g. Ndongo) is going to be a pain in the ass and will slow the timeline even further. My two cents.

[Glen]

I'm asking Abdul and Leo in the Chat page if they can help us salvage some of these events.

[Tom Veil]

Allow me to pose a question that I hope will shed light on the political structure of Jerusalem. I am Father Thomas Veil, an English abbot from a wealthy family. I wish to retire to Jerusalem, where I will buy a large estate and spend my final years offering shelter to Catholic pilgrims. I have obtained my bishop's blessing. From whom do I now need permission -- and to whom are those authorities loyal?

[The Sicilian]

Well, in the version that I am reading, you would have to get secular permission to live there from an underling of the Neapolitan Viceroy. If you wished to preach, then probly an underling of the Catholic Patriarch of Jerusalem.

[AJNolte]

as I see it, that would actually simplify things.



the Mamluk army has, yes; the Ottoman one, hasn't.



they left Lebanon after the establishment of the Kingdom of Jerusalem. if the Kingdom is not established, they don't leave Lebanon.


I thought the reason for the Ottomans allowing the existence of the KoJ was the freedom from war with any of the Christian nations of Europe?
And if you try to take it back that's what you're going to get.

This retconing stuff from the beginning of the timeline is getting ridiculous. Not to be a jerk about it, but everyone had the opportunity to complain about historical implausibility when this was actually happening. If we're going to be constantly retconing this thing, I'm out.

[AJNolte]

I'm asking Abdul and Leo in the Chat page if they can help us salvage some of these events.

Why exactly? To the best of my knowledge neither of them has claimed a country.

Seriously: how much are we going to retcon?

[Keenir]

Why exactly? To the best of my knowledge neither of them has claimed a country.

they know the area better than I do.

Seriously: how much are we going to retcon?

until the moderators are content that the timeline is plausible.

that's what it seems like to me. (I'm just trying to comply with what they want)

[The Sicilian]

I thought the reason for the Ottomans allowing the existence of the KoJ was the freedom from war with any of the Christian nations of Europe?
And if you try to take it back that's what you're going to get.

This retconing stuff from the beginning of the timeline is getting ridiculous. Not to be a jerk about it, but everyone had the opportunity to complain about historical implausibility when this was actually happening. If we're going to be constantly retconing this thing, I'm out.
I agree with AJ entirely. If we retcon this, I'm leaving. I see absolutly no reason to remove such a major event.

[Keenir]

I agree with AJ entirely. If we retcon this, I'm leaving. I see absolutly no reason to remove such a major event.

I just have one question -- if not to retcon things, why are we reviewing everything we've done since the start of this project's divergence?

seriously - that's something I've never understood.

[The Sicilian]

I just have one question -- if not to retcon things, why are we reviewing everything we've done since the start of this project's divergence?

seriously - that's something I've never understood.
No, no, no. I'm out if we retcon away the war, not if we retcon anything.

Reviewing and changing the events for plausibility's sake is absolutly necessary. I just do not find these ones particularly unplausable, and (if we change them drastically) it screws up a huge portion of what we've done.

[Keenir]

Reviewing and changing the events for plausibility's sake is absolutly necessary. I just do not find these ones particularly unplausable, and (if we change them drastically) it screws up a huge portion of what we've done.

okay....then, to keep it as plausible as we can, let's say that the Spanish, Naples, and Knights seized Jerusalem from Egypt...but leave the Ottomans uninvolved in the conflict. (at most, bribed them to stay out of the fight)

how's that?

[Tom Veil]

Well, in the version that I am reading, you would have to get secular permission to live there from an underling of the Neapolitan Viceroy. If you wished to preach, then probly an underling of the Catholic Patriarch of Jerusalem.

In that case, I do not think that it is realistic for the Ottomans to be OK with the political arrangement. Naples will be under constant threat of invasion -- from a larger, more sophisticated neighbor, might I add.

[Smaug]

In that case, I do not think that it is realistic for the Ottomans to be OK with the political arrangement. Naples will be under constant threat of invasion -- from a larger, more sophisticated neighbor, might I add.

Could they decide to make it a city-state? Let it have 3 Protectors, with religious freedom. I don't know, maybe noone is allowed the title King or Emperor. Perhaps Visier, Duke, and <insert Judaic title>. Just a thought, it would free up the powers having to worry about the taking of Jurusalem. Perhaps all 3 parties, donate a small force, thats sole purpose is to defend the city against any, including the parties in question, from attacking it.

Something like this might allow for the current situation in the Levant.

Just flinging it:)

[The Sicilian]

Could they decide to make it a city-state? Let it have 3 Protectors, with religious freedom. I don't know, maybe noone is allowed the title King or Emperor. Perhaps Visier, Duke, and <insert Judaic title>.
Is there any historical precident for that? I think that everyone would bicker over titles and rights and such, and the whole thing would escalate into bloodshed.

Naples has a legitimate bloodline claim to the KoJ. I think they would be stuborn and demand the entire thing. BTW, the KoJ was more than just the city. It included modern Israel, Westbank, Gaza, costal Lebanon, and eastern Jordan.

Something like this might allow for the current situation in the Levant.

Just flinging it:)

I like your suggestion, but I think it may be too touchy-feely between religous zealots for it to work. Glen, AJ, Keenir; what do you guys think?

[Smaug]

I think it may be too touchy-feely between religous zealots for it to work.

I know, but we have to do something. I certainly don't want to rewrite this whole business, Hell, its probably 1/6 or 1/7 of the whole timeline so far. Just sayin...

[The Sicilian]

I think it may be too touchy-feely between religous zealots for it to work.

I know, but we have to do something. I certainly don't want to rewrite this whole business, Hell, its probably 1/6 or 1/7 of the whole timeline so far. Just sayin...
I know, and I agree. But there are more plausable solutions. Like the Ottomans staying out of the war entirely.

[Keenir]

I know, and I agree. But there are more plausable solutions. Like the Ottomans staying out of the war entirely.

so far, that's my vote.

all it means is two things:
1. I have to find another way to kill Selim, and find something to do with those extra janissaries.
2. the Mamluks and their vassal troops who in the original ATL fought the Ottomans in Anatolia and Syria, are now free to wheel around and do a pincer movement on the Knights and other crusaders.

I think the one power that could help - that has no claim to the City - are teh White Sheep to the east.

just a thought.

[Keenir]

Could they decide to make it a city-state? Let it have 3 Protectors, with religious freedom.

question: to whom would it tithe to, under this system?

I'm just wondering. it might be an idea for some part of the world in this ATL's distant future.

[Smaug]

question: to whom would it tithe to, under this system?

I'm just wondering. it might be an idea for some part of the world in this ATL's distant future.

I just thought it might diffuse the situation. Perhaps make commercial areas that are responsible, tax wise, to the sponsor state, while 10 % goes to improvement of the city. I didn't really think about it:/

[Glen]

I have to take some responsibility for this. I relied too much on each of us reading up and understanding our areas of responsibility, and then as a group community policing events. In part I have held back before this because I didn't want to be the sole voice saying "no" to everyone, and I was innundated as is just getting the stuff put together and spell checked and what not.

The reason for the review for the necessity of changes was that when I enquired of other members of the board why they were not following along with the timeline or interested in the project's progress was that it had grown too implausible.

We're trying to build a plausible alternate history here, and so that was very, very concerning.

I thought the reason for the Ottomans allowing the existence of the KoJ was the freedom from war with any of the Christian nations of Europe?
And if you try to take it back that's what you're going to get.

This retconing stuff from the beginning of the timeline is getting ridiculous. Not to be a jerk about it, but everyone had the opportunity to complain about historical implausibility when this was actually happening. If we're going to be constantly retconing this thing, I'm out.

Why exactly? To the best of my knowledge neither of them has claimed a country.

Seriously: how much are we going to retcon?

they know the area better than I do.



until the moderators are content that the timeline is plausible.

that's what it seems like to me. (I'm just trying to comply with what they want)

I agree with AJ entirely. If we retcon this, I'm leaving. I see absolutly no reason to remove such a major event.

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

You guys do realize that almost everyone who lives in this "Kingdom of Jerusalem" is Muslim, right? This period is way, way too late for there to be any hope of maintaining a Christian state there - not when the Ottomans and Mamelukes are right there.

[Grimm Reaper]

Kingdom of Jerusalem? Wasn't the last shred of that kingdom overrun in 1291?;)

[The Sicilian]

You guys do realize that almost everyone who lives in this "Kingdom of Jerusalem" is Muslim, right? This period is way, way too late for there to be any hope of maintaining a Christian state there - not when the Ottomans and Mamelukes are right there.
There was a population excahnge after the foundation. Maronites, Italians, Spanish, and general European Catholics flooded in, while the Muslims fleed to Egypt or to the Ottomans.

You are right in that there is still a large Muslim population (and a sizeable Orthodox one as well), but Sicily has a history of tolerating Muslims and Eastern Christians. In fact, most of the laws of the de Hauteville line of Sicilian kings were based off of Greek and Islamic sources (along with French and Norman).

[The Sicilian]

Kingdom of Jerusalem? Wasn't the last shred of that kingdom overrun in 1291?;)
Yup. It has been brought back from the dead by a bunch of marauding Sicilians. :D

[AJNolte]

okay....then, to keep it as plausible as we can, let's say that the Spanish, Naples, and Knights seized Jerusalem from Egypt...but leave the Ottomans uninvolved in the conflict. (at most, bribed them to stay out of the fight)

how's that?

Makes sense. We could even give you Selim's head on a platter if you ask us to, seeing as he's a disloyal son. Heck, we can put him in a sunny cell on Rhodes right next to Cem the Pretender if you like.

And I agree; I'm not opposed to any aand all retconing. I can see retcons, for example, with regard to rapid tech developments or the development of concepts for which there's no framework. This was a political event however, andI think we have to keep in mind that more implausible political events have happened OTL. I'd also like to point out that this event was written up the first week of the timeline, and we havebeen doing mini-plausibility reviews week by week since we've started.
Frankly, I thought last week's delay was probably necessary, as it gave people a chance to catch up. But I'm starting to get concerned that we're still retconing, and doing so for stuff thatgoes back to the beginning of the timeline.

[Glen]

You guys do realize that almost everyone who lives in this "Kingdom of Jerusalem" is Muslim, right? This period is way, way too late for there to be any hope of maintaining a Christian state there - not when the Ottomans and Mamelukes are right there.

At this point, we don't need to 'maintain' one, just salvage enough of these events so the work wasn't wasted. If it fails in future, such is life....

[Glen]

Okay, one suggestion has been made to have the war retconned to be only against the Mameluks without the Ottomans involved.

Though I do have another idea....give me a moment....

[Glen]

Previously on 1493::rolleyes:

1493:

Ottoman Empire: Prince Selim enters into secret negotiations with the Mamelukes.

Magreb:

Muhammad XII [Boabdil of Granada], has a major argument with his Mother and her advisors, and moves to the City of Zarzis (in SE Tunisia).

1494:

Spain:

Cem gathers an army of Moors in southern Spain with the avowed intent of roling back the reconquista. The Spanish meet him in open battle and defeat him, sending him in chains back to Rhodes. As a result of this Moorish uprising, all Moors who do not convert are expelled from Spain, and stricter standards of conversion are applied. Since those converso Jews remaining in Spain did not take part in the uprising, attitudes toward them soften, if only slightly.

Ottoman Empire

Led by Prince Selim, the army of the Ottoman Empire marches toward their southeast border, intent on removing the Mamelukes from the area. The majority of those Janissary's who aren't in the Rumeli of the Empire are accompanying the army.

The Ottoman navy takes anchor outside of cannon range for now, off the coast of the Mamluk encampment...with a splinter of the navy sailing down to the coast of Jerusalem.

Eastern Mediterranean:

Cem the Pretender, claimant to the Ottoman throne, flees his confinement in Paris and returns to Rhodes, calling on Pierre DAubusson, the grand-master of the order, to lead a crusade on Cem's behalf. Cem makes vague half-formed promises about converting to Christianity. Debate rages across Rhodes as to what should be done. DAubusson knows that the order is in far too vulnerable a position for a crusade at this point. Yet can he pass up the possibility of a Christian Ottoman emperor? As time passes however, it becomes clear that Cem's promised conversion to Christianity is less than genuine. Cem still promises the Rhodeans rich gifts of territory and possible restoration to Jerusalem (on which promise he's in little position to make good). Ultimately, DAubusson rejects this call for a crusade, claiming that "as the last Christian presence in Ionia it is paramount upon me, as grand-master, to look first to the order and it's preservation." Later historians have claimed that DAubusson truly was the first grand master to turn away from the crusader ideal, but this is far from the truth. In reality, DAubusson did not want a crusade which he could not win. Not all in the order agree with DAubusson however. About a hundred knights, and a strong company of men-at-arms, leave Rhodes, claiming that DAubusson has "betrayed the principles of the Order of Saint John." They take up residence at the freshly built Bodrum castle in Helecarnassus, and immediately write to the Pope calling for recognition as "the true order of Saint John". They also immediately begin raiding the Ottoman coastline in a determined fashion. Meanwhile Cem, eager to pursue the dream of empire, flees Rhodes for Spain, landing in southern Andalusia and seeking to gather an army of the disaffected Moors there.

A joint Rhodean expedition is dispatched to defeat a band of rogue Rhodeans and Muslim fanatics conducting piratical attacks from Helecarnassus. This joint expedition creates the opportunity for future Ottoman-Rhodean cooperation.

Egypt:

The Mameluke Sultan, az-Zahir Sayf-ad-Din Jaqmaq, ordered the mobilization of all troops in Eastern Egypt and Sinai to confront the advancing Ottoman troops. Upon reaching an agreement concerning Prince Selim's claim to the Ottoman throne, the Mameluke troops of Eastern Egypt and Sinai were deployed to assist Prince Selim in his quest.

Maghreb:

Muhammahad XII has a fight with his Mother, and moves along with most of the Army of Granada [and the Treasury] to Zarzis in southern Tunisa. Most of Moorish Granadians fleeing from Spain go either to Tielsim [small kingdom now part of Morocco] if followers of Muhammad XII’s Mother, or to Zarzis if a followers of Muhammad XII.

1495:

Ottoman Empire:

Hearing of unprovoked attacks conducted by the sect he had so recently granted amnesty to, Bayezid sends a hundred janissaries to sort out those who were made gazis. Two dozen of the sect are hung for heresy. The remainder takes this as the warning it is. The Ottoman border quiets down.

The Ottoman Sultan, Bayezid, Caliph to the Faithful, Shadow of God on Earth, heir of the Prophet, accompanied by Prince Ahmed and every other good son of the Caliph (all the sons but Selim) join the army in readiness for the impending battle. All the Princes know that when their brother Selim is captured, he will be killed for treason.

The Ottoman navy takes anchor outside of cannon range for now, off the coast of the Mameluke encampment...with a splinter of the navy sailing down to the coast of Jerusalem.

The Holy Land:
Rhodean galleys, in conjunction with a large fleet on loan from their Catholic Majesties of Spain (who are eager to buff their already shiny crusader bone fides) launch a surprise attack on Jaffa, and after seizing the city march directly for Jerusalem, laying siege to the city and calling for it's surrender. While the army encamps and part of the navy begins ferrying supplies inland, a large portion of the Rhodean and Spanish galley fleet begin harrying the Egyptian coast, feinting toward Alexandria. DAubusson also calls on the Maronite Christians of Lebanon to aid his army, as well as the Lebanese Druze.

Jerusalem falls, and DAubusson enters it in triumph (I'm extrapolating this development from the extra troubles of expansion and rebellion). DAubusson leaves a substantial Spanish/Rhodean garrison in Jerusalem, bolstered by Maronite warlords from the Lebanon who have come to aid their Catholic brethren.

Egypt:

The Mamelukes begin their westward expansion toward the Barbary Coast. The Sultan, looking more to the battles in the Levant sends a small but powerful army, he believes will be able to conquer Tripolitania, and Tunisia, as both are suffering from warlordism. He also sends some troops with supplies for the Arab/Berber Kingdoms Fighting Alodi.

Makuria, & Nobatia, begin winning some battle pushing Alodi away from the Coast.
The king of Alodi, send envoys to Ethiopia and to Europe requesting aid.

DAubusson turns his eyes to Alodi, asking for aid from his Spanish, Neapolitan and Milanese allies to "free this Christian kingdom from the savage and heathen Mamelukes." A large naval squadron begins sailing for Alexandria, preparing to capture this city then send forces down the Nile, thereby cutting the Mamelukes in half, trapping Selim's forces between the Christians and Ottomans and freeing Alodi. DAubusson also sends a letter to the Nagas of Ethiopia asking him to come to the aid of his Christian brothers in Alodi.

Maghreb:

The Mamelukes recapture all of Libya east of Tripolitania.

Camel traders from the Kel Ahaggar tribe and Kel Aijer tribes find gold along their camel trade routes near to where both are based in the Sahara.

1496:

Fall 1496 – 1519: In the Ottoman Empire, the recruiting and training of janissaries was not interrupted by the Janissary Civil War (ref: the War against the Mamluk). However, the Janissary Civil War *did* disrupt the flow of new janissaries; it had always been traditional for a young janissary, upon the completion of his training and education, to be an apprentice in another part of the Empire…ie, apprenticed to carpenters, shipbuilders, etc. What the Janissary Civil War did was leave a lot of apprentices in the field they were apprenticed to; over the next two decades, through a policy of what one might consider benign neglect, very few janissary apprentices were brought into the military after the end of their apprenticeship….and those few (anywhere from 1-10% depending on the year) were mostly to the border with the Kingdom of Jerusalem (see 1504)

Ottoman Empire:

Spring 1496: Half of the janissaries who were in the Ottoman army fighting the Mamelukes, joined with Selim (their favorite to inherit the Ottoman throne). The other half of the janissaries, fearing loss of privilege and status - not to mention the very existence of their Order - met them in open and pitched battle on the plains north of Jerusalem. The Bayezid-loyal ones won the day. The disloyal ones fled to Egypt and Persia, while the loyal ones were given residences in Rumeli. Poets in the ensuing weeks and months would call this the Janissary Civil War.

Summer 1496: Selim is captured by soldiers loyal to his brothers Ahmed and Korkud. Invited to dine with his brothers, Selim is poisoned during the dinner.

Holy Land:

Naples reasserts her claim to the defunct Kingdom of Jerusalem. They send troops to Jerusalem to back up the Crusaders.

Egypt:

The Rhodeans and Alodi dealt the Mamelukes a mighty blow. As a result of being sandwiched between two bloodthirsty, Christian forces, the Mameluke army was too widespread to react quickly. Although the campaign in the west was successful in securing the Barbary Coast (northern Libya), all of Upper Egypt was ceded to the Alodi up to the ancient Nubian cities of Aswan and Luxor on the River Nile.

Maghreb:

The remains of the Granadian army have settled in Zarzis or in Tripoli; they prevent the Mameluke from conquering Tripoli when they take the rest of Libya.

1497:

Ottoman Empire:

Selim is captured by soldiers loyal to his brothers Ahmed and Korkud. Invited to dine with his brothers, Selim is poisoned during the dinner.

Holy Land:

Naples reasserts her claim to the defunct Kingdom of Jerusalem. They send troops to Jerusalem to back up the Crusaders.

Egypt:

Next, DAubusson turns his eyes to Alodi, asking for aid from his Spanish, Neopolitan and Milanese allies to, "Free this Christian kingdom from the savage and heathen Mamelukes." A large naval squadron begins sailing for Alexandria, preparing to capture this city then send forces down the Nile, thereby cutting the Mamelukes in half, trapping Selim's forces between the Christians and Ottomans and freeing Alodi.
DAubusson also sends a letter to the Nagas of Ethiopia asking him to come to the aid of his Christian brothers in Alodi.

The Mamelukes ask for terms, and the war ends. The Ottomans receive Syria, and the Levant outside of Jerusalem. Tunisia receives Tripolitania. Alodi receives all of Nubia south of the old pre-Mameluke border. That there are two Muslim Kingdoms in the area, is ignored in the peace settlement. The Crusaders [except they do not call themselves that] receive Jerusalem and Alexandria.

Maghreb

Death of Muhammad Al-Maghili, a renowned theologian from Tlemcen. There are accusations of assassination, though nothing is ever proved.

Enough Moors have immigrated to the region south of Zarzis that is being called New Granada by Europeans. Due the increasing persecution of Jews in Europe, Boabdil has also begun attracting a lot of the Spanish Jews from Granada. The presence of significant numbers of the Granadian army allowed the Kingdom of Tiesliem [NW border coast] to hold off annexation by Morocco.

A small war of supremacy breaks out between two tribes, the Kel Ahaggar and Kel Aijer.

1498:

Ottoman Empire:

1498 Fall: Having been injured in battle against the Mamelukes, Bayezid finds his wounds are still a pain to him. First making certain that Prince Ahmed is in Constantinople, Bayezid embarks on the hajj, dining with regional nobles and notables on the road to Mecca.

Bayezid dies as he is making his return from completing the hajj. Ahmed, closest to Constantinople, grabs the throne; most of his brothers are already dead from battle and disease, but Ahmed orders the death of every surviving brother, save for Korkud, whose loyalty Ahmed considers to be beyond question.

To mark the coronation, a sailor brings to Constantinople something he has found and wrapped with the greatest of care: the hand of John the Baptist, found abandoned in a cave.

1500:

Ottoman Empire:

April 1500:
Emperor Ahmed of the Ottoman Empire delivers a speech before those assembled before the gates of his palace, with copies of his speech sent to the Pope in Italy, the Pope in Cairo, DAubusson of the Knights of Rhodes, the Imams and tribal chiefs of the Druze communities, and the monarchs of Naples and Spain:

I, Ahmed Ibn-Bayezid, Emperor of the Roman Empire, Caliph of the Faithful, Shadow of God on Earth, heir to the Prophets, successor to Julius Caesar, do make the following notations to the layout of my land and those conquered lands.

I now strengthen the millet of the Druze, granting them self-rule within the Lebanon portion of my Empire to a greater degree than ever before. The Lebanon may administer its spiritual governance, though taxes/tribute still need be sent to Constantinople; in the matter of secular governance, appeals may be made to my august person. That in mind, I agree to promote the development of an Army of the Lebanon, led by Lebanese in battles against our mutual enemies.

To avoid the quibbling and squabbles which may lead to civil wars and invasions of a land I myself consider sacred, I hereby state that the Realm of Jerusalem is to be governed by the Latin Patriarch, and I leave it to my Catholic allies to settle amongst themselves which of them shall hold that post. For as long as there is peace in Jerusalem, I shall allow it autonomy (though the Patriarch must acknowledge my civil dominance of the landscape around him); should great violence break out, the armies of the Ottomans and the Druze shall be upon you. Also, Jerusalem must not bar the travel nor molest the Sunni travelers from my Empire, the Yemeni lands, nor Misir. Should any Christian man or Christian family wish to leave the Realm of Jerusalem, he and they must not be barred from leaving, nor his relatives harried; in return, I shall allow any Christian within my land to emigrate to Jerusalem if they so wish to do so. Lastly, the keys to the Church of the Sepulchre shall not be taken from the possession of the families to whom Salah-Al-Din (Saladin, as you call him) entrusted those keys to; in that spirit, administration of the Dome of the Rock shall be granted to the families entrusted by Salah-Al-Din with the keys to the Holy Sepulchre, and neither the land of the Dome of the Rock nor the families involved in administrating it, shall be molested or threatened.

I shall approve a Coptic Christian to rule the conquered lands of Misir, upon the selection of a suitable candidate by his holiness the Pope of Cairo. I leave your self-governance in your own hands, for as long as you prove capable of doing so. Tribute shall be sent to Constantinople on a yearly basis; this is symbolic, so you remember that I can easily raise the amount if given cause – do not give me cause. Do not raise your hands or allow hands to be raised against the Sunnis in your land, as they are under my spiritual protection. Know that your trade shall primarily be with the Ottoman Empire, the merchants of Yemen, the Knights of Rhodes, and lastly, the Alodi. Lastly, I task the Coptic lord of Misir to raise an army loyal to Misir which will not raise arms against myself.

These are my words.

Egypt:

The Shia of Egypt flee in two major directions, and one minor direction. Most emigrate to Persia, some others head to Mamluk North Africa in the hopes of finding favorable rulers there, and a few families head deeper into Africa.

1501:

Eastern Europe:

Moldavia, Wallachia, Russia, and Austria band together and pledge aid to the Ottomans in their war against the Malmuks on the condition that they surrender all their holdings in Europe. Side note: The Russians enter only if Moldavia/Wallachia recognize Vasili's claim to Constantinople. The Ottomans agree to surrender an equal amount of land in Europe, but only if they are recognized as the successor to Caesar.

Ottoman Empire:

1501 March: Sultan Ahmed of the Ottoman Empire sends one of his sisters (still in her early twenties) to the Khan of the Krimea, in appreciation for Krimea's loyalty.

1501 Late April: Sultan Ahmed of the Ottoman Empire sends an embassy (led by his older sister, who's in her early or mid thirties) to the lord of the White Sheep Turks, with the intention of opening relations between the White Sheep and Ottoman Turks.

1501: Emperor Ahmed orders that Bulgaria begin shipping large quantities of nails and hemp (for rope) to the shipyards in Galata and Gallipoli. In addition, he demands a large number of Roman-style shortswords be delivered to Constantinople. In the shipyards of the Empire, construction begins on more ships to supplement the ones presently at port and those on patrol.

Late 1501: Emperor Ahmed of the Ottoman Empire sends missives to the governors (ooc: and whomever else is in charge) of the Crimean, instructing them to grant freedom *of passage _through_ Crimea* to the Tsar of Russia and the Tsar’s army and navy…but also instructing the Crimeans to strike back at any Russian who lashes out at the Crimeans, particularly the honor of Crimean women. Encouragement is given to those Crimeans who volunteer to serve in the navies of the Russians (but only for the upcoming offensive) or the Ottomans.

1501 Late: Ahmed writes the following to the Tsar:

To Ivan (third of your name) III Vasilevich (Иван III Васильевич), Tsar of the Rus’ and Tsar of conquered peoples of the North,

I confess I am confused. You state that you will allow me the title “Caesar of the Muslims,” yet refuse to recognize me as “Caesar” and refuse to recognize the very successor nature of my capital, founded by Emperor Constantine himself?

I also confess to curiosity: how are you to bring any army or navy to bear upon the Mamluks? You are far removed from any supporter of the Mamluks which I am aware of.

Holy Land:

The Grand Commandry of the Rhodeans in Jerusalem is officially established. Over time, this will grow into one of the major Hospitaler commandries in the world.

1502:

Egypt:

The Ethiopians arrive in Eygpt. They present the Sultan with a large trapesty showing ships transversing the Nile Canal. It shows the ships paying tolls at either end. It also shows a map along the bottom of where the canal was.

Maghreb:

1502 May: Prince João-Baptista meets with the North African Christians on his way to the Holy Land.

Ottoman Empire:

The Ethiopians arrive in Constantinople, and pay their respect to the Patriarch of Contantinople, and invite all Christians in the Ottoman empire to seek refeguee in the Byzantine Christian Kingdoms of Adiol and Axum.

1503:

Ottoman Empire:

Emperor Ahmed, taken aback by the rumors that he has a cousin, fires off a message to Grand Master DAubusson. Ahmed both demands confirmation/negation of these rumors, and demands that the boy be brought to Constantinople.

1504:

1504: In the Ottoman Empire, al scaloccio (a technique wherein all the oarsmen on a single bench share a single oar) and galleasses are adopted from the Venetians and other Italian expatriots who’ve taken residence and service under the Sultan’s banner.

Construction begins in Galata and Gallipoli (in the Ottoman Empire) on galleons suitable for warfare. At the same time, janissaries are sent to lead local troops in preparation for battle – and they are sent to the border shared with the Kingdom of Jerusalem, every tent facing east.

1506:

Rhodes:

The Knights of Rhodes officially vote to change their name to "The Sovereign Military Order of the Knights of Jerusalem and Rhodes". Commonly however, people begin once again referring to them as the Hospitalers. As more and more Hospitaler strength becomes concentrated in Jerusalem, questions are raised as to the future of Rhodes.

1509:

1509: Emperor Ahmed calls for volunteers from every sanjak in the Empire; these men will form the nucleus of a series of settlements (and bases) along the best coastal spots of the Red Sea coast of Arabia. There will be no settlements in the Holy City, of course. Most of the settlers are Footmen and Exemptees.

1509 September 10: Great earthquake takes place. Annals record it as “Lesser Judgement Day.” Istanbul and the surrounding area is devastated.

1509 November:, Prince Osman, son of Emperor Ahmed, has already begun amassing a following in the province of Istanbul: his speeches, given between the times of prayer for devoted Muslims, also count many Christians among the listeners. Osman tells of God’s impatience, that the Lord Allah indeed blesses the Empire, but has sent the earthquake to remind the people that He desires action be taken against the heretic, and not to waste so much time with the schismatic and the unbeliever – translation: Osman has been tasked by God to raise a war against Persia (rather than deal over-much with the Latins). (for Persia hasn’t yet been struck down like Egypt has)

OTL-vs-ATL Note: while Bayezid was rather spiritual, and thus left Persia alone; Ahmed’s only reason for not tackling Persia is that he’s already occupied elsewheres. Historians might well wonder if ATL Ahmed had any role in the planning for this raising of an army.

All through 1510: Osman's followers reinforce the troops placed on the eastern border of the Jerusalem kingdom-millet; like the earlier troops, Osman's followers have their tents opening to the east.

1513:

December 1513: Emperor Ahmed signs his name alongside the Catholic and Orthodox patriarchs of Constantinople, who have penned a letter of question to the originator of the Fredericksburg Decree; their question: what status do Eastern Christians have in this Fredericksburg, and are they as well invited to settle?

1517:

1517: May: Although welcoming the promise of friendship from Constantine son of Cem, Emperor Ahmed still insists on Constantine coming to the court of Constantinople – as the boy never did come as summoned upon Ahmed learning of Constantine’s existence (it’s the one request D’Aubusson never fulfilled).

[Glen]

Hang on a bit, got another angle on this.

Sounds like the Sultan of Mamluk Egypt, Kait Bey had offended both Bayezid II when his brother was poisoned while being entertained by the Bey, as well as the Spanish later in the 1490s when Kait Bey started threatening Christians in Syria as a way to counter the Spanish threatening the Moors in Spain.

The Spanish, Neapolitans, and Knights might decide to attack the Mamluks regardless, but try to get the Beyazid as well to attack them. If Beyazid gets Syria and Lebanon and then the Eastern Red Sea coast including Mecca and Medina, that is quite a gain for the Ottomans at this point in time. While they might not like the Europeans taking Jerusalem, they might bide their time while consolidating what they had already gained off the Mamluks.

I'm going to bounce this off our Ottoman experts to see if it will fly. We'll have to change certain details of the war, but we might be able to save a goodly portion of it, at least what we've got up until the early 1510s.

[Glen]

Still working with Abdul to try and get some plausible variant of the Mamluk War and the Kingdom of Jerusalem through.

In the meantime, I did find something important. Cem had a legitimate son alive in this timeperiod.

Which begs the question, why would the Ottoman Sultan be so worried about his illegitimate son when there's an older legitimate son that has a better claim?

An easy fix would be to kill off his legitimate male line.

[Keenir]

In the meantime, I did find something important. Cem had a legitimate son alive in this timeperiod.

Which begs the question, why would the Ottoman Sultan be so worried about his illegitimate son when there's an older legitimate son that has a better claim?

An easy fix would be to kill off his legitimate male line.

well, Ottoman tradition was that, upon taking the throne, all the new Sultan's brothers were killed. (no idea if the sisters were killed as well)

and, one thing the Ottomans kept trying to reduce as much as possible from the 1300s to the 1500s or so, was that the royal princes would often have regions of the empire who were more loyal to said princes than to the emperor - thus making up a potential threat to the emperor.

[Glen]

well, Ottoman tradition was that, upon taking the throne, all the new Sultan's brothers were killed. (no idea if the sisters were killed as well)

and, one thing the Ottomans kept trying to reduce as much as possible from the 1300s to the 1500s or so, was that the royal princes would often have regions of the empire who were more loyal to said princes than to the emperor - thus making up a potential threat to the emperor.

True, but how does that impact on the fact that in the timeline as of now, there is a lot of interest in Cem's younger illegitimate son as a threat than his legitimate older son who IOTL was recognized by a lot of Europe as a potential claimant to the Ottoman Empire.

We need to either ramp up the presence of his legitimate kid or remove him from play (probably kill him).

[Keenir]

True, but how does that impact on the fact that in the timeline as of now, there is a lot of interest in Cem's younger illegitimate son as a threat than his legitimate older son who IOTL was recognized by a lot of Europe as a potential claimant to the Ottoman Empire.

We need to either ramp up the presence of his legitimate kid or remove him from play (probably kill him).

or have him imprisoned in France. :D

[Glen]

Abdul is making it hard to keep in the KoJ plotline, isn't he?

[Keenir]

Abdul is making it hard to keep in the KoJ plotline, isn't he?

you did ask for help. *nods*
;):cool::D

[AJNolte]

you did ask for help. *nods*
;):cool::D

Keep in mind it doesn't have to be a huge land area.

I would also point out that the "overwhelming majority" of the KoJ's perspective population is not in fact Muslim, if you count incoming Maronites and Eastern Orthodox Christians together.
BTW Glenn: you might take a look at the Mamluk war retcon thread we did a few weeks back.

[AJNolte]

Keep in mind it doesn't have to be a huge land area.

I would also point out that the "overwhelming majority" of the KoJ's perspective population is not in fact Muslim, if you count incoming Maronites and Eastern Orthodox Christians together.
BTW Glenn: you might take a look at the Mamluk war retcon thread we did a few weeks back.

Hmm: if there's no way for an independent KoJ, an independent Emirate of Lebanon largely dominated by the Maronites but closely tied to Naples and Spain combined with Jerusalem as an open city (along the lines of the compromise which Barbarossa accepted after the fourth crusade) might be a possibility.
Unless Abdul is going to tell us that a completely Muslim middle east is an invilable law of history or something.
We could also do the King in Jerusalem thing for Alphonso which I suggested earlier, or some 'protector of the Holy Places' compromise.

[The Sicilian]

I would also be open to having some land in Egypt instead, as this was one of my future goals before the shit hit the fan on this. Of course, then the Christian populace would be up in arms about not taking Jerusalem. This was a crusade afterall.

[AJNolte]

Why? Assume we get Lebanon; then we're defending our Catholic brothers in the Levant? We can probably get open city status for Jerusalem at a minimum. The Turks get Syria, we get Lebanon, the Mamluks keep Egypt and nobody gets Jerusalem. Nobody would be completely satisfied...which will eventually lead to the second Mamluk war.
Personally I'd like to keep the KoJ, but an independent Lebanon would work, would have some justification and can't legitimately called ASB unless you've got some real prejudice against an independent Christian nation in the area.

[Glen]

Why? Assume we get Lebanon; then we're defending our Catholic brothers in the Levant? We can probably get open city status for Jerusalem at a minimum. The Turks get Syria, we get Lebanon, the Mamluks keep Egypt and nobody gets Jerusalem. Nobody would be completely satisfied...which will eventually lead to the second Mamluk war.
Personally I'd like to keep the KoJ, but an independent Lebanon would work, would have some justification and can't legitimately called ASB unless you've got some real prejudice against an independent Christian nation in the area.

Let's try running that by Abdul.

[Glen]

Okay, I see some possibilities for a plausibility fix for the timeline.

1) Minimal changes to keep most of the spirit up to 1510 and results, this might include:

- An added event to have a naval battle (I suggest Venice and Ottomans) weaken the Ottoman fleet temporarily, to make it more plausible that they'd have to go along with a European action.

- An added event of a head trauma or illness that Beyazid recovers from but makes him a little more hostile and poorer judgement than OTL.

- Have the Mamelukes outright conspire with Selim or someone else to attack the Ottomans along the frontier, and embroil the Ottomans in war in Syria first (they might have been encouraged in part by the Ottoman naval defeat, and if the Ottomans are already being attacked, makes taking aid against another Sunni nation more likely.).

- A looser association (no treaty, no supposed fealty relation) between the Ottomans and the Europeans, with a carrot and stick approach to accepting European intervention (help us and we'll attack your enemies from behind and keep Cem nice and quiet (or maybe even turn him over to Beyazid at the end of the action), oppose and we'll set up Cem as yet another threat to your legitimacy).

- Jerusalem at first declared a 'free city' under protection of the Europeans, then later they go full-bore declaring a Kingdom of Jerusalem, which pisses off the Ottomans.

- Mamelukes have a really bad time of it in the Levant and Arabia, encouraging the Alodi to break away formally (and with Ethiopian assistance are able to).

- Ottomans get access to Red Sea ports, maybe capture some ships in port by surprise to give them added muscle there. Mamelukes are forced to pay tribute in form of foodstuffs to support the Hejaz.

Lingering minor problem: Can't see the Mamelukes opening conflict with both Ottomans in the East and Tunis (right?) in the West. Either needs to come before as a separate event, or after as a separate event, or be removed entirely.

Might be best to just move it to after.

For the 1510s, however, there should be real tension with KoJ and Ottomans, and a war between them at some point in this decade. Probably see the Mamelukes join in on the Ottoman side this time.

Thoughts, comments?

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Unless Abdul is going to tell us that a completely Muslim middle east is an invilable law of history or something.

Yes, I am. With the population at 90% Muslim, a Muslim Middle East is inevitable. Even in Lebanon, where there were districts with Maronite majorities, and after the French actually landed troops in 1860 and occupied the area, it still remained under Muslim rule.

If the Ottoman Empire was the moribund state it was in 1800, I would say, "sure, go for it" (although we might note that Napoleon himself failed miserably in the same time period) - but you're facing it at the peak of its vitality. This is a state that crushed all European opposition, including large-scale Crusades, and your asking me to view it as realistic that a sea-borne invasion of no less than an important Holy City is going to have a prayer? It was the proximity of Byzantium that caused the Ottoman rise in the first place, as fighting the infidel attracted lots of warriors to Ottoman banners. A crusade into the Holy Land by the West will activate enormous energies to throw them into the sea.

The Europeans are greatly inferior in numbers, tactics, resources, proximity, political unity, unity of command, and just about every possible category that they would need to have any hope of establishing themselves in the Mid East.

I think it's possible to manipulate events to cause a Christian state to be established (i.e. a storm destroys the Ottoman fleet, freak rains block the roads, the Sultan goes insane, but in such a way that nobody can tell he's insane because the Ottomans would have deposed any ruler that had the slightest disability, etc.), but it's lifespan would be very, very short.

You're talking about genocide to make this work - first of all, I can't imagine why Maronites are going to just drop their ancestral lands, mostly starve to death as they move somewhere else and have to grow crops, all to pay several times the amount of taxes to a feudal authority than they have been. Second, booting out all the Muslims of Palestine is beyond the capabilities of any Crusader government, not just because it would provoke a massive Jihad, but because the economy wouldn't just collapse, it would disappear entirely.

This to me is about the equivalent of Syria today invading France to set up the Islamic Republic of Marseilles. Why not? Southern France is 10% Muslim - is French control over France inevitable?

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Two points.

- Just have the Ottoman border north of Jerusalem. They can just scoop up everything else at their leisure anyway. The Mamelukes have most likely been overthrown and massacred for allowing the holy city to fall to the Infidel.

- You can't do the head trauma thing - Sultans weren't so all-powerful as they might seem, and the elite will not tolerate a ruler operating under disability. He could get very sick for a critical couple of months opening the way for infighting in the court leading to some disarray in Ottoman policy. But again, this is a short-term fix. The pressure to go after Jerusalem in full force will be irresistable. In fact, no Ottoman sultan who neglects to do so will have any legitimacy.

Okay, I see some possibilities for a plausibility fix for the timeline.

1) Minimal changes to keep most of the spirit up to 1510 and results, this might include:

- An added event to have a naval battle (I suggest Venice and Ottomans) weaken the Ottoman fleet temporarily, to make it more plausible that they'd have to go along with a European action.

- An added event of a head trauma or illness that Beyazid recovers from but makes him a little more hostile and poorer judgement than OTL.

- Have the Mamelukes outright conspire with Selim or someone else to attack the Ottomans along the frontier, and embroil the Ottomans in war in Syria first (they might have been encouraged in part by the Ottoman naval defeat, and if the Ottomans are already being attacked, makes taking aid against another Sunni nation more likely.).

- A looser association (no treaty, no supposed fealty relation) between the Ottomans and the Europeans, with a carrot and stick approach to accepting European intervention (help us and we'll attack your enemies from behind and keep Cem nice and quiet (or maybe even turn him over to Beyazid at the end of the action), oppose and we'll set up Cem as yet another threat to your legitimacy).

- Jerusalem at first declared a 'free city' under protection of the Europeans, then later they go full-bore declaring a Kingdom of Jerusalem, which pisses off the Ottomans.

- Mamelukes have a really bad time of it in the Levant and Arabia, encouraging the Alodi to break away formally (and with Ethiopian assistance are able to).

- Ottomans get access to Red Sea ports, maybe capture some ships in port by surprise to give them added muscle there. Mamelukes are forced to pay tribute in form of foodstuffs to support the Hejaz.

Lingering minor problem: Can't see the Mamelukes opening conflict with both Ottomans in the East and Tunis (right?) in the West. Either needs to come before as a separate event, or after as a separate event, or be removed entirely.

Might be best to just move it to after.

For the 1510s, however, there should be real tension with KoJ and Ottomans, and a war between them at some point in this decade. Probably see the Mamelukes join in on the Ottoman side this time.

Thoughts, comments?

[AJNolte]

Yes, I am. With the population at 90% Muslim, a Muslim Middle East is inevitable. Even in Lebanon, where there were districts with Maronite majorities, and after the French actually landed troops in 1860 and occupied the area, it still remained under Muslim rule.

If the Ottoman Empire was the moribund state it was in 1800, I would say, "sure, go for it" (although we might note that Napoleon himself failed miserably in the same time period) - but you're facing it at the peak of its vitality. This is a state that crushed all European opposition, including large-scale Crusades, and your asking me to view it as realistic that a sea-borne invasion of no less than an important Holy City is going to have a prayer? It was the proximity of Byzantium that caused the Ottoman rise in the first place, as fighting the infidel attracted lots of warriors to Ottoman banners. A crusade into the Holy Land by the West will activate enormous energies to throw them into the sea.

The Europeans are greatly inferior in numbers, tactics, resources, proximity, political unity, unity of command, and just about every possible category that they would need to have any hope of establishing themselves in the Mid East.

I think it's possible to manipulate events to cause a Christian state to be established (i.e. a storm destroys the Ottoman fleet, freak rains block the roads, the Sultan goes insane, but in such a way that nobody can tell he's insane because the Ottomans would have deposed any ruler that had the slightest disability, etc.), but it's lifespan would be very, very short.

You're talking about genocide to make this work - first of all, I can't imagine why Maronites are going to just drop their ancestral lands, mostly starve to death as they move somewhere else and have to grow crops, all to pay several times the amount of taxes to a feudal authority than they have been. Second, booting out all the Muslims of Palestine is beyond the capabilities of any Crusader government, not just because it would provoke a massive Jihad, but because the economy wouldn't just collapse, it would disappear entirely.

This to me is about the equivalent of Syria today invading France to set up the Islamic Republic of Marseilles. Why not? Southern France is 10% Muslim - is French control over France inevitable?

Keep in mind that you've got a semi-autonomous emirate in Lebanon as of 1600 under Faqhr Ad-Din. Not a Christian state alone granted (it's a Maronite-Druze hybred), but also not completely tied to the Ottomans (it enjoyed close ties with Tuscany).
Granted, the Ottomans were, at the very least, spread more thinly and had been defeated at Lepanto and elsewhere. Still, most of your objections to an independent Christian state are as valid in the early 1600s as they are at this point.
Assume that Jerusalem is lost quite quickly. Assume--and I think this is plausible--that the Druze and Maronites both backed the Europeans--first against the Mamluks and second against the Ottomans, and did so with European backing.
Under these circumstances, an independent Lebanon is plausible even if the KoJ is not.

[The Sicilian]

Yes, but there is the same problem as in Christians taking Egypt. What was there? This was a crusade, so the Christians would be fighting to get Jerusalem. I doubt that they would go to Lebanon over Jerusalem.

[Keenir]

Keep in mind that you've got a semi-autonomous emirate in Lebanon as of 1600 under Faqhr Ad-Din. Not a Christian state alone granted (it's a Maronite-Druze hybred), but also not completely tied to the Ottomans (it enjoyed close ties with Tuscany).

I think a certain 16th Century Jewish heresy might be more helpful to your cause (led by a certain false messiah)

after all, what better lure to Jews than Jerusalem itself?

Assume that Jerusalem is lost quite quickly. Assume--and I think this is plausible--that the Druze and Maronites both backed the Europeans--first against the Mamluks and second against the Ottomans, and did so with European backing.

tiny question -- if the Druze and Maronites see the Ottomans come crashing down on the temporary occupiers of Jerusalem, why would they side with the folks who'd just gotten their arse whooped?

[AJNolte]

I think a certain 16th Century Jewish heresy might be more helpful to your cause (led by a certain false messiah)

after all, what better lure to Jews than Jerusalem itself?



tiny question -- if the Druze and Maronites see the Ottomans come crashing down on the temporary occupiers of Jerusalem, why would they side with the folks who'd just gotten their arse whooped?

You're assuming a clear-cut and decisive Ottoman victory. Not going to happen. Abdul can disparage the European troops all he wants, but keep in mind that the KoR held off two sieges of Rhodes by themselves, and that the Spanish and Neapolitan troops would be exceedingly well-trained. If you're talking about an Ottoman attack before 1510, then you're fighting DAubusson and Alphonso of Naples, probably with their Catholic Majesties as well. ITTL DAubusson has a lot more respect and therefore hasn't degenerated into insanity (or at least incompitence) as happened OTL.
Also, the Ottomans are going to have to come through Lebanon to get to Jerusalem in the first place. And you really do not want to fight the Druze and Maronites in their home mountains.
Personally I'd rather not have a war with the Ottomans at all. If it does happen however it's not going to be an easy one.
Oh, and keep in mind that Bayazid was the one who suggested the crusade to DAubusson in the first place (I have the PM saved).
I guess the question is: what is the goal or interest of the Ottoman Empire in this situation? If the goal is to keep the Christians out of the Levant, why did you invite them in in the first place? If the goal is to consolidate the Empire's dominance over the Muslim world, why worry about the Christians? If you're going to try and do both, you risk irritating the anti-Ottoman League (which would be much less friendly without DAubusson's intervention, which itself was predicated on the close personal relationship established, among other things, through the capture of Jerusalem). About the best you could expect under such circumstances would be a temporary armastice with the Rhodeans, not the assistance in forging ties with the Christian world that you received ITTL.

Given your intention of moving to consolidate your position in the Muslim world, I think the alliance with the Christians and permission of some sort of independent or semi-independent Christian state in the Levant is plausible. However if you have other goals you'll have to adjust your foreign policy accordingly, as will the Rhodeans, Neapolitans and Spanish.

[AJNolte]

Yes, but there is the same problem as in Christians taking Egypt. What was there? This was a crusade, so the Christians would be fighting to get Jerusalem. I doubt that they would go to Lebanon over Jerusalem.

Ah, but losing Jerusalem only to fall back to Lebanon is likely.

[Keenir]

but keep in mind that the KoR held off two sieges of Rhodes by themselves,

given that the Ottoman navy was crap in shallow water, and that Rhodes is an island, that's not surprising.

ITTL DAubusson has a lot more respect and therefore hasn't degenerated into insanity (or at least incompitence) as happened OTL.

question - was his degeneration at least partly from medical reasons?

Also, the Ottomans are going to have to come through Lebanon to get to Jerusalem in the first place. And you really do not want to fight the Druze and Maronites in their home mountains.

I won't be.

Oh, and keep in mind that Bayazid was the one who suggested the crusade to DAubusson in the first place (I have the PM saved).

could I see it?

I guess the question is: what is the goal or interest of the Ottoman Empire in this situation?

since my original goal turned out to be implausible, I'm re-thinking it.

However if you have other goals you'll have to adjust your foreign policy accordingly, as will the Rhodeans, Neapolitans and Spanish.

one thing sticks out in my mind...just an observation: if those three are focusing their attention on the Ottomans and the Kingdom of Jerusalem, will the Portugese be able to get away with even more?
:)

[Glen]

Two points.

- Just have the Ottoman border north of Jerusalem. They can just scoop up everything else at their leisure anyway.

You mean leave out Mecca and Medina at first? When would they 'scoop them'?

The Mamelukes have most likely been overthrown and massacred for allowing the holy city to fall to the Infidel.

More likely the current Bey is overthown by another faction within the Mamelukes, I'd think.


- You can't do the head trauma thing - Sultans weren't so all-powerful as they might seem, and the elite will not tolerate a ruler operating under disability. He could get very sick for a critical couple of months opening the way for infighting in the court leading to some disarray in Ottoman policy. But again, this is a short-term fix. The pressure to go after Jerusalem in full force will be irresistable. In fact, no Ottoman sultan who neglects to do so will have any legitimacy.

This is all short term. Hopefully you can help with some insight into future developments once we get this squared away, so we don't have this kind of trouble again.

Actually, Abdul, I was thinking something more subtle here. The Sultan wouldn't be overtly incompetent, just lose enough of his ability and temperment to get into this debacle, but not in a way that would be obvious infirmity (trust me, this sort of thing can happen).

Thanks for the help.

[Glen]

So, what do our participants think of this outline for a fix?

Okay, I see some possibilities for a plausibility fix for the timeline.

1) Minimal changes to keep most of the spirit up to 1510 and results, this might include:

- An added event to have a naval battle (I suggest Venice and Ottomans) weaken the Ottoman fleet temporarily, to make it more plausible that they'd have to go along with a European action.

- An added event of a head trauma or illness that Beyazid recovers from but makes him a little more hostile and poorer judgement than OTL.

- Have the Mamelukes outright conspire with Selim or someone else to attack the Ottomans along the frontier, and embroil the Ottomans in war in Syria first (they might have been encouraged in part by the Ottoman naval defeat, and if the Ottomans are already being attacked, makes taking aid against another Sunni nation more likely.).

- A looser association (no treaty, no supposed fealty relation) between the Ottomans and the Europeans, with a carrot and stick approach to accepting European intervention (help us and we'll attack your enemies from behind and keep Cem nice and quiet (or maybe even turn him over to Beyazid at the end of the action), oppose and we'll set up Cem as yet another threat to your legitimacy).

- Jerusalem at first declared a 'free city' under protection of the Europeans, then later they go full-bore declaring a Kingdom of Jerusalem, which pisses off the Ottomans.

- Mamelukes have a really bad time of it in the Levant and Arabia, encouraging the Alodi to break away formally (and with Ethiopian assistance are able to).

- Ottomans get access to Red Sea ports, maybe capture some ships in port by surprise to give them added muscle there. Mamelukes are forced to pay tribute in form of foodstuffs to support the Hejaz.

Lingering minor problem: Can't see the Mamelukes opening conflict with both Ottomans in the East and Tunis (right?) in the West. Either needs to come before as a separate event, or after as a separate event, or be removed entirely.

Might be best to just move it to after.

For the 1510s, however, there should be real tension with KoJ and Ottomans, and a war between them at some point in this decade. Probably see the Mamelukes join in on the Ottoman side this time.

Thoughts, comments?

[Keenir]

Actually, Abdul, I was thinking something more subtle here. The Sultan wouldn't be overtly incompetent, just lose enough of his ability and temperment to get into this debacle, but not in a way that would be obvious infirmity (trust me, this sort of thing can happen).

ie, the 17th Century Ibrahim "the Mad"....who was deposed after 8 years on the throne by a 7-year-old!

[Keenir]

An added event of a head trauma or illness that Beyazid recovers from but makes him a little more hostile and poorer judgement than OTL.

I'd suggest something more plausible -- ie, Beyazid is injured while out on a hunting party, and he withdraws to recuperate (this being on the historical heels of the attempt on his life)...and while he's out of the picture, one of the Viziers makes the deal with DAubusson about the crusade. (a Venetian double agent?)

[Glen]

I'd suggest something more plausible -- ie, Beyazid is injured while out on a hunting party, and he withdraws to recuperate (this being on the historical heels of the attempt on his life)...and while he's out of the picture, one of the Viziers makes the deal with DAubusson about the crusade. (a Venetian double agent?)

How is this more plausible?:confused:

[Keenir]

How is this more plausible?:confused:

because an insane sultan - even mildly so - would be replaced - particularly in the 1500s.

(and any "head injury" severe enough to cause a personality change, would require him withdrawing from ruling to recuperate)

[Glen]

because an insane sultan - even mildly so - would be replaced - particularly in the 1500s.

(and any "head injury" severe enough to cause a personality change, would require him withdrawing from ruling to recuperate)

First, he wouldn't be insane. He'd have a case of mild brain injury. Second of all you can have some personality change without a severe head injury.

Keenir, trust me on this one. I do this for a living.

[Keenir]

First, he wouldn't be insane. He'd have a case of mild brain injury. Second of all you can have some personality change without a severe head injury.

Keenir, trust me on this one. I do this for a living.

I don't doubt that you're very good at it....but any Sultan whose personality changed enough that he's seen to allow (by action or inaction) the Holy Cities/City to fall into Infidel possession, it does not matter how severe or mild his injury was: he will promptly be replaced by a relative who will - as their first act - liberate the Holy Cities/City in question.

suddenly its a good thing that Korkud is still around.

[Glen]

I don't doubt that you're very good at it....but any Sultan whose personality changed enough that he's seen to allow (by action or inaction) the Holy Cities/City to fall into Infidel possession, it does not matter how severe or mild his injury was: he will promptly be replaced by a relative who will - as their first act - liberate the Holy Cities/City in question.

suddenly its a good thing that Korkud is still around.

WTF? All of a sudden you, who arranged for the Ottomans to essentially GIVE away Jerusalem, are now arguing this?

[Smaug]

This is a truly vexing situation. Is there noone from Asia who might roll in and create a situation where the claiments might for whatever reason allow a free Jurusalem in order to shorten thier lines? Maybe a Timur like character, or a Hindu/Sikh, assuming the Persians are of no use at this time, who might distract the Ottomans?

I'm not picking on the Ottomans per say, but I really don't want to move on with any of my states until a foundation has been set. Africa needs to squared away too.

[Keenir]

WTF? All of a sudden you, who arranged for the Ottomans to essentially GIVE away Jerusalem, are now arguing this?

I admit that my original idea was wrong. I AM NOW ATTEMPTING TO ASSIST IN MAKING THE TIMELINE AS PLAUSIBLE AS POSSIBLE -- SOMETHING YOU HAVE REPEATEDLY INSISTED UPON !

[Glen]

I admit that my original idea was wrong. I AM NOW ATTEMPTING TO ASSIST IN MAKING THE TIMELINE AS PLAUSIBLE AS POSSIBLE -- SOMETHING YOU HAVE REPEATEDLY INSISTED UPON !



Sorry, I probably over-reacted. I've just been trying to salvage as much of the timeline created thus far.

[Tom Veil]

This is a truly vexing situation. Is there noone from Asia who might roll in and create a situation where the claiments might for whatever reason allow a free Jurusalem in order to shorten thier lines? Maybe a Timur like character, or a Hindu/Sikh, assuming the Persians are of no use at this time, who might distract the Ottomans?
****

There are no Sikh nations yet -- Guru Nanak Dev is still alive (and he would appreciate any suggestions about his new religion should develop ;)). Only one Hindu nation has the power to launch a land-based war on the Ottomans -- Bharata -- but as a matter of policy they will not send their soldiers even as far as Persia, because they desperately want to avoid having a holy war declared against them. With proper persuasion (and funding) from their European trading partners, though, both Bharata and Vijayanagara could be persuaded to enter a naval war with the Ottomans.

[Keenir]

Sorry, I probably over-reacted. I've just been trying to salvage as much of the timeline created thus far.

even the implausible bits?

[Glen]

Okay, lets try this then....

Rebel son (Selim, Ahmed, someone else?) gets support from Mamelukes and marches into Ottoman Empire, sparking yet another war.

Bayazid strikes back.

The Naples and Rhodeans with Spanish naval backing eventually jump into the fray in a bid for Jerusalem. They get there first as the Ottomans are fighting the main Mameluke/Usurper force in Syria.

The Neapolitans and Rhodeans take Lebanon and the Palastinian coast, get to Jerusalem first. Rather than add more enemies to his bill, Bayazid agrees to Jerusalem being an 'Open City' with himself and the King of Naples as 'Protectors', and the Knights allowed to establish a Commandry in the city. The Neapolitans are allowed to remain in Lebanon/Coastal Palestine for now....

The Ottomans continue on to take Egypt. They acknowledge the Alodi who have thrown off the Mameluke in the South, and accede to the Granadians in Tunis as the Ottomans are already a bit extended.

An unsteady peace ensues until after the death of Bayazid, though clearly it is likely that the Ottomans will move on the Europeans at some point.

How about that?

[Keenir]

Rebel son (Selim, Ahmed, someone else?) gets support from Mamelukes and marches into Ottoman Empire, sparking yet another war.

may as well be Ahmed. he died in 1512 in OTL with the rest of his brothers.

The Naples and Rhodeans with Spanish naval backing eventually jump into the fray in a bid for Jerusalem. They get there first as the Ottomans are fighting the main Mameluke/Usurper force in Syria.

makes sense, given the extent the Mamluks were at back then.

The Ottomans continue on to take Egypt. They acknowledge the Alodi who have thrown off the Mameluke in the South, and accede to the Granadians in Tunis as the Ottomans are already a bit extended.

sounds good - up to "continue on to take Egypt".

I'd suggest "The Ottomans stop to tend their wounds & prepare to take Egypt, likely as not in the near future."

I suggest that for one reason: its a narrow swath of land between the Kingdom of Jerusalem and Persia (unless the White Sheep give it another name, that's what I'm going to call it; sound fair?)...so Naples'll be aware that anything that's aimed at the Mamluks would be bad news for the Kingdom as well.

[Glen]

may as well be Ahmed. he died in 1512 in OTL with the rest of his brothers.

makes sense, given the extent the Mamluks were at back then.

Ahmed it is. Would you care to take a crack at the re-write?

sounds good - up to "continue on to take Egypt".

I'd suggest "The Ottomans stop to tend their wounds & prepare to take Egypt, likely as not in the near future."

I suggest that for one reason: its a narrow swath of land between the Kingdom of Jerusalem and Persia

Actually, between the Kingdom of Lebanon:rolleyes: and Arabia. The White Sheep holdings did not go that far into Arabia.

(unless the White Sheep give it another name, that's what I'm going to call it; sound fair?)...

Actually, if you want to use the name of a region, I recommend Mesopotamia, which is the part of the White Sheep holdings that predominantly border the Ottomans. Persia is further away.

so Naples'll be aware that anything that's aimed at the Mamluks would be bad news for the Kingdom as well.

Well, that's as may be....

[Tom Veil]

I will endorse any Jerusalem TL that both Glen and Keenir endorse.

[The Sicilian]

That looks fair enough.

[AJNolte]

However I don't see that DAubusson, Alphonso and the Spanish would push for a declaration of the KoJ, which would naturally embroil them in a conflict with the Ottomans. Keeping Jerusalem an open city would work and has historical precedent.

[Keenir]

However I don't see that DAubusson, Alphonso and the Spanish would push for a declaration of the KoJ, which would naturally embroil them in a conflict with the Ottomans. Keeping Jerusalem an open city would work and has historical precedent.

um, what precedent?

(seriously...what's an "open city"?)

[Glen]

Some more elaboration on the suggested fix to the timeline:

The Mamelukes IOTL did some half-hearted persecution of Christians in Syria in an attempt to get the Spanish to back off their persecution of Iberian Muslims. Not much came of it IOTL.

However, ITTL the Mamelukes could have racheted it up further, infuriating Ferdinand and Isabella, enough so that they decide to intervene militarily.


At the same time as the Spaniards are getting incensed, the Mamelukes are conspiring with Ahmed to overthrow Bayezid, and attack the Ottomans to install him. Bayezid fights back and starts moving in from the North, giving the Europeans their 'in'.

Since there is no Italian Wars, they tap their ally Naples to join them. Naples and Rhodes actually do have some connections OTL IIRC, so have the Rhodeans get involved through the Neapolitans.

Between the Ottoman and Spanish actions, the Mamelukes lose the Levant. The Europeans reach Jerusalem first, as the Ottomans had to secure their border first. Its a tense situation. If the Ottomans turn against the Europeans, the Mamelukes may ally with them to roll back the Ottomans. If the Europeans turn against the Ottoman, the Mamelukes may ally with the Ottomans to throw the Europeans back in the sea. Neither side is willing to see Jerusalem in the hands of the other. And neither the Ottomans nor the Mamelukes want the Spaniards there. However, the king of Naples is a relative of Spain, but has shown a lot more tolerance of non-Christians. So he would be more palatable if any of the Europeans are to hold the coast. Jerusalem is made an open city, and the Rhodeans allowed their Commandry.

Is this the MOST plausible series of events? No. Is it plausible? Yes. And it will allow us to keep most of the base of what we are doing. Oh, and it does give a reason for the King of Naples to have his son wed an Ottoman-type, to seal the deal (not that it will last).

Once we clarify this stuff from the past, we can then start writing stuff to develop the future in a more probable course. Occasional low probability events are okay, but the majority should be high probability.


Note: I wouldn't have Naples actually declare a KoJ unless they are ready to fight the Ottomans. They may do so in future anyway, but I think it would definitely trigger it.

Now then, IF they end up fighting anyway, the Neapolitans might want to declare the KoJ to raise Christian supporters from Europe to their cause, but that is for the future I think.

[Keenir]

Some more elaboration on the suggested fix to the timeline:
So he would be more palatable if any of the Europeans are to hold the coast. Jerusalem is made an open city, and the Rhodeans allowed their Commandry.


okay...I approve all of this...and have only one question: what is an "open city"?

[The Sicilian]

Right, Naples won't go thumb its nose at the Ottomans. But the rulers still use the title 'King of Jerusalem', and treat the Lands they hold in the Middle East as their own.

They Ottomans would have to tolerate some Christian prescence in the Levant after the war, and Sicily has been the most historically tolerant of religous minorities.

[Glen]

okay...I approve all of this...and have only one question: what is an "open city"?

Basically a city that is not claimed by any one nation, typically that is kept open in its trade, travel and commerce with two or more states.

[AJNolte]

Sounds like we have a consensus.

How soon does war have to break out? Can peace last until 1520 or is this too ASBy?

[Glen]

Sounds like we have a consensus.

How soon does war have to break out? Can peace last until 1520 or is this too ASBy?

Good Question.

We have several different possible conflicts that could have broken out in the latter half of the 1510s. I think we need to examine that window as the likeliest for a meltdown of relations.

[Glen]

BTW, I just figured out that the King of Spain and the King of Naples are less related than I thought. They are both descendants of King Ferdinand I (not the grandson of Ferdinand II). The current King of Naples is the Great grandson of Ferdinand I, and the King of Spain is his grandson. That's a very tenuous family connection. However, the political ties are still reasonable as they are of the same House (though one through a 'natural son').

[Keenir]

Good Question.

We have several different possible conflicts that could have broken out in the latter half of the 1510s. I think we need to examine that window as the likeliest for a meltdown of relations.

*nods* suddenly the Portugese offers get a lot more appealing.

of course, it all boils down to the territorial aims of Isa.
(Ahmed, as I was playing him, envisioned himself not simply as a Rennascience Prince, but as Roman/Byzantine Emperor...OTL, Selim, wasn't so much; in the original ATL, the shipbuilding increased as Isa rose to favor...will that stay the same? I think it might)

[Glen]

*nods* suddenly the Portugese offers get a lot more appealing.

of course, it all boils down to the territorial aims of Isa.
(Ahmed, as I was playing him, envisioned himself not simply as a Rennascience Prince, but as Roman/Byzantine Emperor...

Since Ahmed is now conspiring with the Mamelukes, does he ever take the Ottoman throne?

OTL, Selim, wasn't so much; in the original ATL, the shipbuilding increased as Isa rose to favor...will that stay the same? I think it might)

Isa increasing naval power is well in keeping with Ottoman behavior in this period. In fact, if you have a shorter reign for Selim, Isa might turn more and more towards naval power instead of land power....

[Glen]

Keenir, gotta question.

Most of your post Mameluke events have Ahmed as Sultan of the Ottomans. Do you want Ahmed to be traitor and killed, or traitor who later ascends the throne anyway?

I don't know much about Ahmed, but Selim we know overthrew his father OTL, so him making a bid earlier is plausible.

I guess what I need to know is, who is the traitor working with the Mamelukes, and what is the line of succession from Bayezid to Isa?

Since Ahmed is now conspiring with the Mamelukes, does he ever take the Ottoman throne?



Isa increasing naval power is well in keeping with Ottoman behavior in this period. In fact, if you have a shorter reign for Selim, Isa might turn more and more towards naval power instead of land power....

[Keenir]

Since Ahmed is now conspiring with the Mamelukes, does he ever take the Ottoman throne?

no. he didn't in OTL anyway - Selim did.

Isa increasing naval power is well in keeping with Ottoman behavior in this period. In fact, if you have a shorter reign for Selim, Isa might turn more and more towards naval power instead of land power....

sounds good.


*Venice gets apprehensive* :)

[Keenir]

Keenir, gotta question.

please.

Most of your post Mameluke events have Ahmed as Sultan of the Ottomans. Do you want Ahmed to be traitor and killed, or traitor who later ascends the throne anyway?

killed - poisoned as originally in the ATL Selim was.

I don't know much about Ahmed,

neither do I - none of the Ottoman books mention more than his existance (and having three sons by 1512)

but Selim we know overthrew his father OTL, so him making a bid earlier is plausible.

with Bayezid dying sooner, Selim won't need to overthrow Bayezid.

I guess what I need to know is, who is the traitor working with the Mamelukes,

Ahmed. a search-and-replace should work fine.

and what is the line of succession from Bayezid to Isa?

Bayezid
Selim
Isa

[AJNolte]

What conflicts did you have in mind?

[Keenir]

What conflicts did you have in mind?

the Portugese War, certainly.

[Smaug]

Okay, lets try this then....

Rebel son (Selim, Ahmed, someone else?) gets support from Mamelukes and marches into Ottoman Empire, sparking yet another war.

Bayazid strikes back.

The Naples and Rhodeans with Spanish naval backing eventually jump into the fray in a bid for Jerusalem. They get there first as the Ottomans are fighting the main Mameluke/Usurper force in Syria.

The Neapolitans and Rhodeans take Lebanon and the Palastinian coast, get to Jerusalem first. Rather than add more enemies to his bill, Bayazid agrees to Jerusalem being an 'Open City' with himself and the King of Naples as 'Protectors', and the Knights allowed to establish a Commandry in the city. The Neapolitans are allowed to remain in Lebanon/Coastal Palestine for now....

The Ottomans continue on to take Egypt. They acknowledge the Alodi who have thrown off the Mameluke in the South, and accede to the Granadians in Tunis as the Ottomans are already a bit extended.

An unsteady peace ensues until after the death of Bayazid, though clearly it is likely that the Ottomans will move on the Europeans at some point.

How about that?

I'm not a player here, but thats a good bit of concession all the way around.

Even Saladin, offered rights of safety to Pilgrims didn't he? I don't the Free City thing as that wacky.

[Glen]

Okay, still working on the rest of the events, but this is a start. Note that to make things work, we actually have to have the war occur fairly early, both to stifle the Columbus voyages and to take advantage of Mameluke persecution of Christians as a cause belli. Note also that the Mediterranean storms tend to be worst in November, so I hit the Ottoman fleet with it so they can't cut off the Europeans by sea as easily.


Possible retconned events:

1493:

France:

1493 Spring: Cem the Pretender, claimant to the Ottoman throne, flees his confinement in Paris.

Spain:

1493 March 15: Christopher Columbus regales Spain with tales of the riches he has seen in Asia after returning from his first voyage.

1493 April: Some of Christopher Columbus' companions on the journey tell a less flamboyant tale, bringing some of Columbus' claims into question. Word of this reaches the Spanish Court, making Ferdinand and Isabella weigh how much support to give to a second journey under Columbus.

1493 Summer: Word reaches the Spanish Court of the increased persecution of Christians throughout the Mameluke Empire, even in Jerusalem. Rather than causing a rescension of the expulsion of the Muslims or a softening of the Inquisition's attempts to find secret Muslims in Spain, it instead provokes an opposite reaction. Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain are incensed by the persecution of Christians in Mameluke lands. The Spanish begin considering actions directly against the Mamelukes.

1493 Fall: When word reaches the Spanish Court of renewed war between the Ottomans and Mamelukes along their border, the Spanish see an opportunity. They prepare the Spanish navy and call upon their ally and fellow Trastámaran, the King of Naples to join with them. Plans for a follow up voyage by Columbus are put on hold indefinitely.

Rhodes:

1493 Summer: Cem the Pretender, claimant to the Ottoman throne returns to Rhodes, calling on Pierre DAubusson, the grand-master of the order, to lead a crusade on Cem's behalf. Cem makes vague half-formed promises about converting to Christianity. Debate rages across Rhodes as to what should be done. DAubusson knows that the order is in far too vulnerable a position for a crusade at this point. Yet can he pass up the possibility of a Christian Ottoman emperor? As time passes however, it becomes clear that Cem's promised conversion to Christianity is less than genuine. Cem still promises the Rhodeans rich gifts of territory and possible restoration to Jerusalem (on which promise he's in little position to make good). Ultimately, DAubusson rejects this call for a crusade, claiming that "as the last Christian presence in Ionia it is paramount upon me, as grand-master, to look first to the order and it's preservation." Later historians have claimed that DAubusson truly was the first grand master to turn away from the crusader ideal, but this is far from the truth. In reality, DAubusson did not want a crusade which he could not win.

1493 Fall - Winter: DAubusson learns through his connections with the Neapolitan Court that the Spanish and Neapolitans are considering a foray against the Mamelukes in retaliation for their persecution of Christians, especially now that they are tied up in a war with the Ottomans. This seems to be the opportunity DAubusson was waiting for. He sends messages of alliance to Spain and Naples. He ponders what use Cem could be in this endeavor, but for the time being decides to hold him in reserve.

Mameluke Empire:

1493 Summer: The Mamelukes increase persecution of Christians throughout the Empire, not just in Syria, in response to the expulsion of Muslims from Spain the previous year.

The Mameluke Sultan, az-Zahir Sayf-ad-Din Jaqmaq, orders the mobilization of all troops in Eastern Egypt and Sinai to confront the advancing Ottoman troops. Upon reaching an agreement concerning Prince Ahmed's claim to the Ottoman throne, and adjustments to the border in favor of the Mamelukes, the Mameluke troops of Eastern Egypt and Sinai were deployed to Syria to assist Prince Ahmed in his quest.

1493 Fall: Ahmed leads a faction of Ottomans and a large Mameluke army over the border between Syria and Anatolia, intent on wresting the Ottoman Empire from his father, Bayezid.

Ottoman Empire:

1493 April: Prince Ahmed enters into secret negotiations with the Mamelukes to assist him in overthrowing his father, Sultan Bayezid of the Ottoman Empire.

1493 November: As the Ottoman navy masses to assist in repelling Ahmed's faction and their Mameluke allies, a terrible storm strikes, causing the loss of a large number of Ottoman ships, and damaging most.

Maghreb:

1493 Spring: Muhammahad XII has a fight with his Mother, and moves along with most of the Army of Granada [and the Treasury] to Zarzis in southern Tunisa. Most of Moorish Granadians fleeing from Spain go either to Tielsim [small kingdom now part of Morocco] if followers of Muhammad XII’s Mother, or to Zarzis if a followers of Muhammad XII.

1493 Spring: The Mamelukes begin their westward expansion toward the Barbary Coast. The Sultan sends a small but powerful army he believes will be able to conquer Tripolitania and Tunisia easily, as both are suffering from warlordism. He also sends some troops with supplies for the Arab/Berber kingdoms fighting Alodi.

1493 Summer: The Mamelukes recapture all of Libya east of Tripolitania. The remains of the Granadian army have settled in Zarzisi; they prevent the Mameluke from conquering Zarzisi when they take the rest of Libya.

1494:

Ottoman Empire:

1494 Winter:

Led by Prince Selim, the army of the Ottoman Empire marches toward their southeast border, intent on repelling the Mamelukes and Ahmed Ottomans from the area. The majority of those Janissary's who aren't in the Rumeli of the Empire are accompanying the army. The remnant of the Ottoman navy takes anchor outside of cannon range for now, off the coast of the Mameluke encampment.

A significant portion of the janissaries who were in the Ottoman army meant to fight the Mamelukes join with Ahmed (their favorite to inherit the Ottoman throne). The other half of the janissaries, fearing loss of privilege and status - not to mention the very existence of their Order - met them in open and pitched battle on the plains north of Damascus. The Bayezid-loyalists under the command of Selim win the day. The disloyal ones flee to Egypt and Mesopotamia, while the loyal ones were given residences in Rumeli. Poets in the ensuing weeks and months would call this the Janissary Civil War.

1494 – 1519: In the Ottoman Empire, the recruiting and training of janissaries was not interrupted by the Janissary Civil War (ref: the War against the Mamluk). However, the Janissary Civil War *did* disrupt the flow of new janissaries; it had always been traditional for a young janissary, upon the completion of his training and education, to be an apprentice in another part of the Empire…ie, apprenticed to carpenters, shipbuilders, etc. What the Janissary Civil War did was leave a lot of apprentices in the field they were apprenticed to; over the next two decades, through a policy of what one might consider benign neglect, very few janissary apprentices were brought into the military after the end of their apprenticeship….and those few (anywhere from 1-10% depending on the year) were mostly to the border with the Kingdom of Jerusalem (see 1504)

Mameluke Empire:

1494 Winter: Taking advantage of the fighting to the North, Spanish, Neapolitan, and Rhodean ships launch an invasion of Lebanon and Palestine, eventually marching for Jerusalem, laying siege to the city and calling for it's surrender. While the army encamps and part of the navy begins ferrying supplies inland, a large portion of the Rhodean and Spanish fleet begin harrying the Egyptian coast, feinting toward Alexandria. DAubusson also calls on the Maronite Christians of Lebanon to aid his army, as well as the Lebanese Druze.

[Glen]

One minor point