Romania as a major European power.

Is it doable? I want to write an alternate history timeline that starts off the 20th Century with Romania as a European power about as powerful as France or Germany (I assume that, because the alternate history would have to diverge from the actual time line before 1900 to achieve this, the thread belongs here and not in the 1900 and after subforum). OF course, before I write the timeline, I need to know if such a thing is even plausible, or if Romania is just too rugged and sparsely populated to be an influential power. It would also be nice to have a couple suggestions of where to break off from the original time line.
 

Germaniac

Donor
Well, for one moldovia and Wallacia cannot be a satalite of the Ottomans for so much of its history. Romanian as a nationality must emerge sooner, it has to be at the forefront of development, and it must be able to hold off the Hungarians and the Austrians and the Ottomans, and the Russians and hell the Alien Space bats cause there going to be a-swarming!
 
IMHO, the POD should be in a more successful liberal revoluton in 1848. There were liberal motes in Bucharest too, and they would certainly benefit if Hungary insurrection is successful.
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
The turks never defeat Romania and they retake Anatolia and Thrace in the 15th century?

Whoa, retake? Are you implying that the Wallachians, Moldavians, and Transylvanians are one point controlled Thrace and Anatolia?
 
I think the best place for a POD is the unification of 1600. In that year Mihai, the ruler of Wallachia managed to unite Wallachia, Moldova and Transylvania for about a year until he was assassinated.

The POD would have to be him not being assassinated and keeping the kingdom together by playing the great powers against eachother and forcing them all to accept Romania's independence under threat of allying with their enemies.

Since the big powers in the region at that time were Austria, Ottoman Empire and Poland, the balance of power was very fragile, a united Romania with a strong leader like Mihai would be more than enough to upset it.
 
IMHO, the POD should be in a more successful liberal revoluton in 1848. There were liberal motes in Bucharest too, and they would certainly benefit if Hungary insurrection is successful.

Well, the Moldavian and Wallachian revolutions were in a very tricky position, because however much popular support their goals had, there wasn't any way to stop the Russians from invading to uphold reaction.

It should be noted that the Romanian majority of Transylvania, highly disadvantaged by Hungarian rule, were grudgingly pro-Hapsburg and willing to fight on their behalf, so...

I'd agree that the place to go is back when wise rulers of the principalities were able to stear an independent course between the Hapsburgs, Poles, and Ottomans.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
The fundamental problem with a Romania as powerful as France or Germany are this:

Number of speakers in Europe

German 105 millions

French 70 millions

Romanian 24 millions

Romanias potential are much more limited compared to France and Germany as best we could see the Romanians dominating in a multinational dynastic state, but in modern day that's not the most stable solution.
 

wormyguy

Banned
Of course, if the Romans managed to Latinize more of the Danubian basin, the number of Romanians might be much higher.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
Of course, if the Romans managed to Latinize more of the Danubian basin, the number of Romanians might be much higher.

The problem are that you need a POD at least before 10th to succed at that, you could with a relative late POD (post 10th century) raise the numbers of Romanian to 40 millions, but it still doesn't compare to Germany or France. Another problem are the geography of Romania which doesn't lend itself to a centralised state. Through you could with a lot of work transform the Donau to a easten Rhine. But you would need a densely populated state which lay on both side of the river.
 
The problem are that you need a POD at least before 10th to succed at that, you could with a relative late POD (post 10th century) raise the numbers of Romanian to 40 millions, but it still doesn't compare to Germany or France. Another problem are the geography of Romania which doesn't lend itself to a centralised state. Through you could with a lot of work transform the Donau to a easten Rhine. But you would need a densely populated state which lay on both side of the river.

I agree. With a lot of work and luck, I can Romania being a maybe a 2nd or 3rd tier power at the start of the 20th century, but Romania simply lacks sufficient numbers of Romanians to compete with its more powerful neighbors.
 
France, or Germany run about 600,000 sq KM while Romania is only 200, give yourself a POD that allows the Annexation of Bulguria [at 100] and you are half the size of Spain.
Use a early enuff POD to allow the taking in of Serbia, add in early Industrialisation [aka Meiji]. And You are on your way.
 
France, or Germany run about 600,000 sq KM while Romania is only 200, give yourself a POD that allows the Annexation of Bulguria [at 100] and you are half the size of Spain.
Use a early enuff POD to allow the taking in of Serbia, add in early Industrialisation [aka Meiji]. And You are on your way.

I don't see that much of an issue with size, greater romania is about the same size as great britain.

sea access though could be a problem though, what with three straits to pass through before you reach an ocean.
 

Valdemar II

Banned
I don't see that much of an issue with size, greater romania is about the same size as great britain.

sea access though could be a problem though, what with three straits to pass through before you reach an ocean.

The biggest problem with Romania are geography, while Romanias mountains protected it from being overrun by the Slavs, it's also made it hard to centralise and build a modern state.
 

Susano

Banned
Territroial size is entriely meaningless. Theres no reason to even discuss that. Popzulation size is what always matters.
 
Territroial size is entriely meaningless. Theres no reason to even discuss that. Popzulation size is what always matters.
Well, there are also resources and opportunities to expand power (ie colonisation) to consider; plenty of relatively small countries population-wise *cough* Netherlands *cough* became quite significant powers due to trade and whatnot (though none did really surive through centralisation and imperialism as a superpower still, admittedly). Though I don't think Romania has many options in that regard. Does its soil hold any riches?
 

Susano

Banned
Well, there are also resources and opportunities to expand power (ie colonisation) to consider; plenty of relatively small countries population-wise *cough* Netherlands *cough* became quite significant powers due to trade and whatnot (though none did really surive through centralisation and imperialism as a superpower still, admittedly). Though I don't think Romania has many options in that regard. Does its soil hold any riches?

Oil in the Bukovina which was somewhat impportant in the interbellum, but it isnt actually much. And, of course, the Transylvanian Saxons came for the same reason ethnic German cities were founded everywhere in Europe East of Germany, to mine stuff ;) Silver, IIRC, but that was exhausted during the Middle Ages and Early Modern Age, too...
 
Top