Cuāuhtemōc
Banned
Make historians view the Ottoman Empire as a continuation of the Roman Empire. You can choose any POD, if it helps making the Ottomans be seen as more an Islamic Turkish successor to Byzantium and Rome. AND GO!
Ottoman Empire seen as a continuation of the Roman Empire
- Thread starter Cuāuhtemōc
- Start date
Do you mean most historians? I think there are already historians who do so. Certainly, in the books I've read on the Ottomans, they've talked about how the Ottomans fundamentally adapted/improved many pre-existing Byzantine systems of governance, especially, I believe, in the realm of taxes.
Taking Rome couldn't hurt though, and I think that a long-term Ottoman presence in Italy, while difficult, is not necessarily impossible.
Additionally, having the Byzantines themselves be more unilaterally regarded as a continuation of the Roman Empire (strange how some people don't) might assist in this regard, though I'm not sure how this could be accomplished. Perhaps with altering some of the Byzantologists of the last 60 years to have less of a focus on dividing the history of the empire into such distinct periods (Late Antique, etc.), and maybe more of a dynastic-style might help.
Islam taking over the heart of new Zion, Great Gatsby
, a flight of Methuselah Monarchs are coming our way. If you thought the first Crusades to of Jerusalem were chaotic, immense and had far reaching implications in the relations of societies in half of Eurasia then I can only imagine what I Pope exiled in France would be calling forth.Islam taking over the heart of new Zion, Great Gatsby
Sorry, can't hear him over the sound of pants-wetting glee by the French monarchy, which has the pope as its b---- once again.
And probably gobbled up half the HRE while the Haps were busy trying to fend off the Ottos. The French are nothing if not willing to ignore religion.
If the Ottoman Empire holds Rome while the HRE is just a rump state of little value/non-existent, then I think the title of "Emperor of the Romans" would be accepted by more.
To be considered a true continuation of Rome, you need to get the majority of the Islamic population of the Ottoman Empire to consider itself "Roman", and to have "Roman" as being synonymous with being an Islamic subject of the Sultan. Stopping the Ottomans calling themselves Caliph will help with this. Though, really, I think it's hard to do. I for one am dead against the idea of considering the Ottomans to be Roman Emperors- I even find the claim of the House of Palaiologos to be fairly dodgy as a "continuation" (as opposed to a successor state).
Roman Emperors for Three Centuries held the title of High Priest and the ERE appointed the Patriarchs. I don`t see why religion gets in the way of Rome.
The Ottomans styled themselves as "Qaysar-i Rum" even before they took Constantinople. What else should they have done to be seen as continuators of Rome?
Speaking for myself, actually been continuators, instead of foreign conquerors.
Speaking for the West, being orthodox (small o) Christian might have helped - although that prejudice should be dead by now.
The fact that Ottoman Sultans (and, correct me if I'm wrong) never, ever primarily thought of themselves as being "Romans", any more than (say) Queen Elizabeth II in her role as Duke of Lancaster thinks of herself as being a Lancastrian.
The Ottomans styled themselves as "Qaysar-i Rum" even before they took Constantinople. What else should they have done to be seen as continuators of Rome?
As did the Bulgarian Tsars, who adopted a heck of a lot more Byzantine stuff than the Ottomans did. Does that mean that there were two equally legitimate Roman Emperors in the Balkans around the year 900?
Because after about 600, to be Roman was to be synonymous with being Christian across much of the Near East- hence the use of the term "Rum" for dealing with Christians by Arab states. Quite apart from that, there's the even more important issue that I raise above. How much of the House of Osman and the Ottoman ruling elite actually considered itself to be "Roman", as opposed to simply Muslim or Turkish?
The use of the term "Rumelia" to mark out specifically the most Orthodox Christian part of the Ottoman state would suggest that the Turks certainly felt there was a distinction between themselves and those who called themselves "Roman".
The Ottomans styled themselves as "Qaysar-i Rum" even before they took Constantinople. What else should they have done to be seen as continuators of Rome?
I thought Mehmed II didn't take that title until after the fall of Constantinople. If it didn't originate with him, who was the first to take that style?
Well the Holy Roman Empire styled itself as successor of Rome and well they weren't for obvious reason. How could the Ottoman be seen as heir of the Empire when they destroyed it?The Ottomans styled themselves as "Qaysar-i Rum" even before they took Constantinople. What else should they have done to be seen as continuators of Rome?
Don't most Chinese dynasties get seen as successors, despite having destroyed the preceding state?
The Ottomans styled themselves as "Qaysar-i Rum" even before they took Constantinople. What else should they have done to be seen as continuators of Rome?
Been Romanians.
Lets see. The early house of Osman is conquered by the resurging Byzantines after the fourth crusade, but are found to be more trouble then they are worth to control, so rather than fully assimilate them, a young nonthreatening member of the house of Osman is made the new ruler, and given a Byzantine position, possibly Despot. As time goes on, this Osman Despotate intermarries with the Byzantine elite, but retains a semi-distinct cultural identity, possibly by continuing to be Muslim. When the empire again begins to recede, the Ottoman Despotate's current ruler feels that his time has come, and marches on Constantinople, declaring himself to be the new Emperor. If he is a Muslim, he will probably need to give his people a high degree of religious tolerance, but can nevertheless attempt to convert them slowly. The new dynasty and Byzantine acceptance of Islam prove to be a turnaround for the empire, and it soon begins to make similar gains to those of the OTL Ottomans, and the Ottoman subculture and Islam begin to flourish, while the people continue to refer to themselves as Romans, use the Byzantine Roman imperial tradition, use the Imperial Eagle as a coat of arms, and speak a mixed Greco-Turkish dialect. That is Ottoman Rome IMO.
The early House of Osman doesn't control anything significant enough to be a problem, though. But let's say that there's an Osman despotate anyhow, because Osman being Michael's vassal isn't that far fetched.
Would be interesting to see that worked out more throughly (as in, a full timeline).