Challenge: Maximum Persian cultural sphere

Rockingham

Banned
In a similar vein to my other thread... how could we have the Persian cultural sphere, in terms of language(both as a primary language, and a language of trade, politics etc.) as well as "Persian" cultural traits reaching their maximum possible extent as of 2000, with a POD no earlier then 1500? Technology should be at as similar development level as now.
 

WyldCard4

Banned
They win one of the really big battles like the one from 300 (can't spell it) and conquer greece, they eventualy conquer all of Europe, they than have a scientific revolution and conquer the world.

Simple but more likely than half the the AH scenerios puplished.
 

Fabilius

WyldCard4 said:
They win one of the really big battles like the one from 300 (can't spell it) and conquer greece, they eventualy conquer all of Europe, they than have a scientific revolution and conquer the world.

Simple but more likely than half the the AH scenerios puplished.
Click to expand...

You didn´t read.

Not until after 1500. I´m assuming he means 1500 a.d.

Because the other thing wouldn´t be challenge.
 

WyldCard4

Banned
Fabilius said:
You didn´t read.

Not until after 1500. I´m assuming he means 1500 a.d.

Because the other thing wouldn´t be challenge.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I am completely wrong and am sorry for it, Ithought I had read it but I must have missed that detail.
 

torque7844

Depends what you mean by the "Persian" cultural sphere. The true Persian cultural sphere died with the Sassanids (at least so my old Farsi instructor used to claim) so if that's what you're talking about then the 1500 POD is already 850 years too late.
 

B_Munro

Well, it's fairly easy to take out the Moghuls with a 1500 POD: Babur was still the ruler of a fairly dinky kingdom outside of India/Pakistan proper. One problem is that the Safavids come to power in 1501: if you get rid of them either you have a fresh period of fragmentation and unrest or perhaps even an Ottoman conquest: if you keep them, you have the problem of resistance by mostly Sunni neighbors to the imposition of a millenial Shi'a regime.

Another problem with the idea of an "extended Persian cultural sphere" was that there already was one - Persian, after all, was the court language of the Delhi sultanate, and in turn of the Mughal empire. Given Persia's very strong cultural influence in India and Central Asia OTL, it's hard to see it being much enhanced, even if a luckier Safavid empire conquers Central Asia and much of NW India [1]...of course, we might see a considerable extension of the region of Shi'a Islam in such a scenario.

Bruce

[1] These are, after all, pre-ethnic-nationalism states: the Persians aren't going to be following a deliberate policy of "Persianification" of the peoples they conquer.
 
Last edited:

Fabilius

WyldCard4 said:
Sorry, I am completely wrong and am sorry for it, Ithought I had read it but I must have missed that detail.
Click to expand...

;) Don´t worry about it Wyldcard, remember, Benjamin Franklin used to say that a reasonably intelligent man could only hope to be right half the time of his life.
 

Faeelin

Banned
I wonder if rather than a more successful Safavids, we want a less succcessful one. So Iran remains Sunni, and Persian remains the language of the Ottoman court...

Thoughts?
 

Rockingham

Banned
WyldCard4 said:
They win one of the really big battles like the one from 300 (can't spell it) and conquer greece, they eventualy conquer all of Europe, they than have a scientific revolution and conquer the world.

Simple but more likely than half the the AH scenerios puplished.
Click to expand...

Fabilius said:
;) Don´t worry about it Wyldcard, remember, Benjamin Franklin used to say that a reasonably intelligent man could only hope to be right half the time of his life.
Click to expand...
Well, Benjamin Franklin was right. Half of what Wyldcard said was correct;)



Faeelin said:
I wonder if rather than a more successful Safavids, we want a less succcessful one. So Iran remains Sunni, and Persian remains the language of the Ottoman court...

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Yes.... actually a Ottoman conquest of Persia may be the way to go. THE Ottomans would be be absorbed further into the Persian cultural sphere...indeed, the Ottoamns may come to be seen as Persian.
 

B_Munro

The_Overlord said:
Well, Benjamin Franklin was right. Half of what Wyldcard said was correct;)




Yes.... actually a Ottoman conquest of Persia may be the way to go. THE Ottomans would be be absorbed further into the Persian cultural sphere...indeed, the Ottoamns may come to be seen as Persian.
Click to expand...

Hmm - a more eastern-oriented Ottoman empire? Perhaps we don't get the sieges of Vienna of the OTL 16th century because the Ottomans are busy during much of the 1500's conquering Kabul and Kandahar and Bukhara and Samarkand.

On the one hand, the circumstances that led to the Cage and a succession of crap Sultans from Selim the Sot onward may be butterflied.

On the other, European military skillz did improve over the 16th century, and the Ottomans being busy in the east may mean the Hungarians may try to get up to monkey business.

On the third hand, moving into octopus territory, the Ottoman system in Europe of limited-tenure land grants in conquered territory, and slave soldiers drawn from Christian territories, isn't going to be applicable when conquering solidly Islamic territories to the east - are the conquests in the east "self-financing" the way the ones in the west were? Perhaps we need a new thread.

Bruce
 

Ridwan Asher

B_Munro said:
Hmm - a more eastern-oriented Ottoman empire? Perhaps we don't get the sieges of Vienna of the OTL 16th century because the Ottomans are busy during much of the 1500's conquering Kabul and Kandahar and Bukhara and Samarkand.

On the one hand, the circumstances that led to the Cage and a succession of crap Sultans from Selim the Sot onward may be butterflied.

On the other, European military skillz did improve over the 16th century, and the Ottomans being busy in the east may mean the Hungarians may try to get up to monkey business.

On the third hand, moving into octopus territory, the Ottoman system in Europe of limited-tenure land grants in conquered territory, and slave soldiers drawn from Christian territories, isn't going to be applicable when conquering solidly Islamic territories to the east - are the conquests in the east "self-financing" the way the ones in the west were? Perhaps we need a new thread.

Bruce
Click to expand...

This reminds me, I heard Abdul Hadi ever said that it was actually better for Suleyman to focus his deal with Persia rather than with Austria. So he would just have to vassalize Hungary and make sure that it would make a good buffer state against Austria, so that he can go for conquest for Persia. We would may see lesser Ottoman expansion to the west, but I'm not convinced that it'll be stopped. In fact, I'd say that Ottoman moves to the west will be lesser just for a while. Battle of Lepanto (the famous one) was supposed to be Ottoman victory if only the commanders could've been more cooperative with each other.

If OE managed to consolidate its control on Persia after wards, Ottomans would gain a better standing against the west actually. NOW they have much more population, much more men to be recruited for the military. Not to mention that OE now has an even better access to the Indian Ocean (a very well bad news for a certain European nation ;)). Honestly, if we can keep this up for enough time, we'll have Indonesia as the eastern frontier of Persian cultural sphere.

For anyone who has yet to know this, there was Kingdom of Aceh in Northern Sumatra, Indonesia who was an Ottoman vassal for a while.
 

Riain

Banned
Safavidwank/renaissance from 1514, choosing a different path from their nieghbours. They focus on maritme power, only attempting to hold their boundaries on land and spread their faith by missionaries. They build a fleet and challenge the newly ascendent Portuguese, and take control of the monsoonal trade routes in the Indian Ocean. They set up outposts around the IO rim, including modern day Perth, and use Sofala as the meeting point to send their wares to Europe, when they aren't shipping them up the Red Sea. Under the Persian influence the Islamic areas of Sth East Asia gradually change to Sunni (is that right, or is it Shia?).

Being a martime/trading hegemony physical sciences are pushed along, Persian fleets and armies being equipped with state of the art firearms, using them in different ways than Europeans. They persevered with and perfected salvo and volley weapons early, and as such didn't succumb to tactical inferiority when the Europeans perfected field cannon.

How's that for a start?
 

Ridwan Asher

Riain said:
Safavidwank/renaissance from 1514, choosing a different path from their nieghbours. They focus on maritme power, only attempting to hold their boundaries on land and spread their faith by missionaries. They build a fleet and challenge the newly ascendent Portuguese, and take control of the monsoonal trade routes in the Indian Ocean. They set up outposts around the IO rim, including modern day Perth, and use Sofala as the meeting point to send their wares to Europe, when they aren't shipping them up the Red Sea. Under the Persian influence the Islamic areas of Sth East Asia gradually change to Sunni (is that right, or is it Shia?).

Being a martime/trading hegemony physical sciences are pushed along, Persian fleets and armies being equipped with state of the art firearms, using them in different ways than Europeans. They persevered with and perfected salvo and volley weapons early, and as such didn't succumb to tactical inferiority when the Europeans perfected field cannon.

How's that for a start?
Click to expand...

I'd say my scenario is better. Though I think I'd might need some corrections from Pasha....

And Safavid was Shia. In fact, they were responsible for turning Persia from a Sunni country INTO Shia.
 
Last edited:

Rockingham

Banned
Emperor Qianlong said:
Aw, after 1500? I was thinking about the Achaemenid/Sassanid empires at first when reading this thread... not even Khwarezm? :(
Click to expand...
Sorry, thats too easy..... make your own thread if you want that;)

R. I. Alsidecias said:
I'd say my scenario is better. Though I think I'd might need some corrections from Pasha....

And Safavid was Shia. In fact, they were responsible for turning Persia from a Sunni country INTO Shia.
Click to expand...
Very modest:rolleyes:.... still you right;)
 

Ridwan Asher

Rockingham said:
Very modest:rolleyes:.... still you right;)
Click to expand...


Well, I was just being honest...;)

Anyway, Ottoman is nevertheless a way better candidate than the Safavids. Even they competed with the Portuguese for spice trade monopoly in Indian Ocean back then, and the temporary vassalage of Aceh by the Ottomans was also part of this whole thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top