The Ottoman Domination

I hark back to a previous thread which was full of interesting ideas from esteemed posters. Basically, with a 15th century POD that leaves France disintegrated, and Spain still not unified, in the early 16th century the Ottomans are victorious.

This leads to an Ottoman domination of Austria and Italy, and eventually of Iberia and Provence, and thus an Ottoman Mediterranean, meaning that the competition in the New World is between the Ottoman domination on the one hand, and mainly British, Scandinavian and some Northern French states on the other.

How is this so far ?


Grey Wolf

pity I was hoping this about a theocratic/fascist state emerging from the ottomans...

but anyways sounds like an interesting idea.

I wonder if the brits would move in to "protect" the Northern French at all.

Assuming that the Holy Roman Empire survives in some form, the Habsburgs look finished. In this TL they don't get Burgundy which remains Valois, and whilst its possible they DO get Britanny (they tried to marry Anne in OTL), this won't give them enough once Austria and Hungary re lost. Their position in Bohemia is easy for the Poles-Lithuanians to threaten, and I would imagine that Poland-Lithuania becomes a massive player in affairs within whatever remains of the HRE. We might even see a claimant from there on the imperial throne ?

If not, those in the best situation to gain the title are the Saxons and the Wittelsbachs.

Reformationary pressures will also be a serious element here. For a start, where is the Pope ? Maybe he's back in Avignon ? I don't see that being very popular ! But with Ottoman forces coming from the North via Austria-Croatia, and from the South via naval landings in Naples, he canot retreat to another wholly Italian city. A Swiss city may make some sense.

Remember, France is fractured here, and Avignon would not place him under the French crown, but under either Burgundy or Anjou etc. IIRC there was a very important theological conference at Lausanne in the early-mid fifteenth century, so maybe it looks like a good bet.

Of course, AGAIN, what is the situation of the Swiss in this TL ? How are Calvin and Erasmus, and perhaps Luther, playing on the theological stage given the increased Ottoman menace ? Does the Greater Menace draw Christianity together, or does the Fall of Rome rend it asunder ? If Saxony gets the imperial crown, then Luther has his own protector as emperor so you could get a Lutheran Church set up on the ruins of the Papacy... Luther as the new Peter ?

Alternatively, the Church either completely fractures or it stays loosely together and perhaps adopts an Erasmian view ?

Grey Wolf

a schism of the catholic church would be a good thing for a standalone ATL not just a part of an ottoman domination ATL...

Arch-Angel said:

I wonder if the brits would move in to "protect" the Northern French at all.

Click to expand...

Given the 15th century POD, I have Edward IV retaking all of Normandy in alliance with Burgundy and with the other French magnates carving their dominions off the dying French crown.

A Breton marriage to a Habsburg looks possible, it was mooted in OTL but of course at THAT time the Habsburg in question already had Burgundy, which in this ATL they never get. Still, it would not be impossible as until the fall of Austria the Habsburgs still hold the imperial crown so A Breton match is not much less likely than the Burgundian one which occurred in OTL.

Regarding England, there were some close relations with Navarre, and I'm thinking that a trans-Pyrenean Navarre may in fact survive despite the later Ottoman conquest of the rest of Iberia.

I could really do with maps of France which show the possessions and areas of influence of the major magnates of the 15th century - often their titles do not tell enough of the story, eg Anjou had possessions all over the place.

Grey Wolf

My view of the Christian nations is that they settle the Northern part of the Americas, push deep into Canada etc, including the Northern islands and establish what become in time autonomous principalities. Trade lanes are North Atlantic, Iceland becomes a major hub of trade. Scotland remains independent, its merchants and aristocrats settle in Iceland,Spitzbergen, N America so the names and influence gets around. There is a definite maritime sweep from Iceland down to Navarre as independence depends on the navy.

The Ottomans colonise S America etc

Independent Indian nations survive into the 20th century, and there are always border wars etc

Tie this thread in with the background to Aurora in the AH fiction forum, they're both talking about the same thing

Grey Wolf

Grey Wolf said:

I hark back to a previous thread which was full of interesting ideas from esteemed posters. Basically, with a 15th century POD that leaves France disintegrated, and Spain still not unified, in the early 16th century the Ottomans are victorious.

This leads to an Ottoman domination of Austria and Italy, and eventually of Iberia and Provence, and thus an Ottoman Mediterranean, meaning that the competition in the New World is between the Ottoman domination on the one hand, and mainly British, Scandinavian and some Northern French states on the other.

How is this so far ?


Grey Wolf

Click to expand...

I still do have a lot of doubts on the feasibility of an Ottoman conquest of Italy and Austria. Consider:
* the best route is probably through the heel of the boot: Otranto was from time to time an Ottoman possession. However, the Ottomans never succeeded in expanding their foothold, and I am quite convinced that the Christian navies (in particular Venice and the Papal States) would be able to interdict a major invasion force.
* the other possible invasion routes are through the eastern Italian border, or along the Danube. The former has the difficulty of a number of quite large rivers obstructing the advance; the latter is the typical Ottoman invasion route which typically reaches the walls of Vienna, and then ebbs back toward the City. I am quite convinced that the structure of the Ottoman Empire does not allow for a power projection of this magnitude (in other words: the Sultan cannot afford to keep an army of sufficient magnitude in Belgrade or North of that.
* OTOH, assuming that Vienna falls, this would make easier an invasion of Germany (again along the Danube). The Alpine passes are quite easier to defend.
* even a complete conquest of Spain is not likely. The problems are the difficulty of moving large armies in difficult terrain and the distance from the center of the empire.

John said that conquests NW of Vienna would not be possible due to the fact that the Ottoman Empire was MUCH more centralized than the old Roman Empire. Distance from Constantinople was the key issue.

He does think that a conquest of Italy is possible, but I do not. A coalition of a few city-states (and the Pope and some allies like Don Juan of Austria) essentially obliterated the entire Ottoman Navy. A full-bore invasion of Italy, which would be resisted to the knife by most Italians, would be a VERY difficult task.

Grey,

I like it. It's very intriguing even with taking Lord Kalvan's observations into account.

About an Ottoman/Northwest Europe competition in the New World; Would the Ottomans have even been interested? I mean at first well before the silver and gold hordes of the Aztecs and Incas were known about?

There were many reasons for Europe's Age of Discovery kicking off but looking for non-Ottoman controlled trade routes in the aftermath of 1453 is a big one. The Portuguese especially putzed around for generations slowly feeling their way around Africa and towards all that silk and spices. With an empire touching on both the Atlantic and Indian Oceans, would the Ottomans necessarily begin exploring in the Atlantic? What reason would they have for doing so prior to an European discovery and exploitation of the indigenous cultures there?

Instead, wouldn't the Ottomans expand towards already known sources of goods? Ottoman explorers, merchants, and fleets would then travel eastward at first. They'd have forts and entrepots in India, they'd be in modern day Indonesia far before any European arrival, they'd be trading with China by sea before the Chinese turn inward, they'd be in contact with Japan, and they'd be more involved in the eastern coast of Africa than in the OTL. The Indian Ocean would become another Mediterrenean for them, an eastern Mare Nostrum.

Who knows? They might even repair that Pharonic canal between the Nile and Red Sea.

Once news of European successes in the New Worlds becomes known; i.e. smallpox and firearms let us steal all this gold, then the Ottomans' attention would turn towards to the Atlantic. Again, who knows, they may even try and reach the New World from the east?


Bill

I have to agree that no matter how big the Ottomans get, there's simply not much reason for them to launch ships into the unknown if they're sitting astride the main east-west trade routes. There's also the fact that the most fertile areas abutting the eastern side of Atlantic are overwhelming located in northwestern Europe.

I think an Ottoman Australia is rather more likely myself, since as one poster noted, if they want spices, all they really have to do is catch the monsoon to the East Indies.

Split in Christendom

The most significant split in Chrisitnaity might between those Christians who aspire to a never ending Crusade mode and those who believe accomodation with the Ottomans (possibly even some syncretism--fabled Christian Rozenkreuz was supposed to have learned Sufi mysteries at Damcar) is the best policy. This could well overshadow the issues of the Reformation.

Tom

Well, as regards the New World ost of the turbulence is happening here in the breadth of the sixteenth century, from one end to the other so to speak. With no unified Spain (I'm imagining a temporary union of Portugal and Castile that then falls apart) there may be some expedition to the West, but not the all-out conquest. At the same time, the Northern European nations are discovering the land around the Saint Lawrence etc. The Ottomans are not IMMEDIATELY going to be in the race as I don't envisage an immediate conquest of the European areas. Thus, by the time the Ottomans do attain the Atlantic, the New World is known about, parts are colonised very lightly and the Iberian nations are probably trading with and massacring Carib peoples.

This of course allows the Aztecs and Incas to continue on independent paths for longer. The Aztecs especially would become aware of the arrival of Europeans in the Caribbean. By the time these are supplemented with Ottomans (and I would imagine gold etc would draw them in), the Aztec Empire will not be vulnerable to falling as per OTL

Grey Wolf

Grey Wof explained:

By the time these are supplemented with Ottomans (and I would imagine gold etc would draw them in), the Aztec Empire will not be vulnerable to falling as per OTL

Click to expand...

Grey,

For that to happen, you'll have to find some way of either lessening the various post-Columbian plagues or giving the Amerinds time to recover from their effects. A technological exchange may help the Amerinds with better arms, but nothing will assist them with the plagues.

Remember, direct physical contact with Old World peoples wasn't necessary for the plagues spread either. The settled peoples of the interior Mississippi/Ohio river valleys were wiped out by diseases introduced by Europeans hundreds of miles away on the coast. Early explorers found hundreds of abandoned, decaying villages. The Incan Empire fell into civil war after a smallpox outbreak nearly a decade before Pizarro landed in Peru. That war had only just been settled and the empire begun to recover when Pizarro came knocking.

Mexico under the Aztecs wasn't exactly placid either. Although Cortez and his merry band showed up about the same time the plagues did, he was able to defeat the Aztecs not because of the epidemics but because he had tens of thousands of Indian allies. He arrived in what can be best called a 'tax revolt' and his native allies did most of the fighting during the seige and conquest of the Aztec capital.

Given the irrational human predeliction to blame anything not quickly understandable on supernatural forces, the sight of diseases that barely bothered the Europeans all but wiping out the Indians must have had a profound effect on both peoples.


Bill

I would agree that some things are unlikely, but in history the unlikely does happen. Take the collapse of Hungary from being a major bastion against the Ottomans to being a strip of land linked to the Habsburgs and run like a military frontier.

Its not intended that any of this occurs immediately, or even quickly, with the whole of the sixteenth century being the vital period

I'm also thinking that combining Reformatory pressures with Ottoman conquests, the flight of the Papacy from Rome (not unprecedented) and the rise of rival churches (an imperial Lutheran one under the Saxon emperor for example) all contribute to weaken 'Christendom' at the same time that they really need to be strong.

Grey Wolf

Bill. quite possibly, but there is no one with the impetus to conquer them. With the Mediterranean a battleground with increasing Ottoman domination, and with Italy and then Spain becoming battlegrounds in their own right, I am envisaging that the adventurers and merchants etc probably do do all the things you say, but that it doesn't turn into conquest of the interior. As you state, the Incans recovered from the disease, due I would think to their organisation and level of civilisation. I could say that quite possibly the Aztecs collapse, as there is a lot of internal tension in an empire run on the subjugation of other nations and the idea of human sacrifice, but it could just as easily survive the convulsions and reform to a degree.

You may well see Portuguese or Castilian islands in the Caribbean, but this would be smaller in extent than OTL, and when the Ottomans come knocking on Iberia the islands are more or less abandoned as ongoing enterprises.

Thanks for your useful contributions, its what I'm looking for

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

As for ruling the distant portions of this ATL Ottoman Empire, why not take the approach used in OTL in the Maghreb? Italy, Iberia and Provence are first ruled by officials sent from Constantinople, but eventually local civilian, military (and perhaps pirate) leaders begin choosing deys to rule with the beys under them. Privateers operating from Iberia could prey upon shipping in the Bay of Biscay and the English Channel. Later on, the dey of Iberia, and perhaps Provence and Italy (Morocco too if the Ottomans go after North Africa as well) might be the one to take interest in the Caribbean to take in revenues for himself.

Grey Wolf further explained:

With the Mediterranean a battleground with increasing Ottoman domination, and with Italy and then Spain becoming battlegrounds in their own right, I am envisaging that the adventurers and merchants etc probably do do all the things you say, but that it doesn't turn into conquest of the interior.

Click to expand...

Grey,

Ah! The scales fall from my bloodshot eyes! European exploration and colonization recieve only a fraction of the support they do in the OTL because of the pressures of the European/Ottoman flashpoints in Italy and Iberia. That leads to all sorts of interesting situations and you were wise to create it.

Rather than being seen as a source of plunder, slaves, and free land, the Americas are now seen as a trade partner. Once the Amerind states recover from the epidemilogical consequences of the Columbian Exchange, they'll be eager consumers of Old World goods. How much gold will a horse bring? Iron? Firearms? European traders operating out of Carribbean island entrepots will get very rich very quickly.

...but it could just as easily survive the convulsions and reform to a degree.

Click to expand...

Most certainly. Especially once the 'tax' issues are dealt with. I wonder whether any Old World religious ideas may have a role in that? Missionaries from all sides; Catholic, Muslim, etc., would be active but without an armed 'assistance'.

You may well see Portuguese or Castilian islands in the Caribbean, but this would be smaller in extent than OTL, and when the Ottomans come knocking on Iberia the islands are more or less abandoned as ongoing enterprises.

Click to expand...

Yes, I see. Far-called our navies melt away... and all that. Contact with the Old World would still occur, but not as frequently as both power blocs have more important issues to deal with closer to home. This TL of yours may be a plausible way for Amerind nations to survive into the 21st Century.

Thanks for your useful contributions, its what I'm looking for

Click to expand...

Glad I could help and please keep sharing with us!


Bill

Matt Quinn said:

John said that conquests NW of Vienna would not be possible due to the fact that the Ottoman Empire was MUCH more centralized than the old Roman Empire. Distance from Constantinople was the key issue.

He does think that a conquest of Italy is possible, but I do not. A coalition of a few city-states (and the Pope and some allies like Don Juan of Austria) essentially obliterated the entire Ottoman Navy. A full-bore invasion of Italy, which would be resisted to the knife by most Italians, would be a VERY difficult task.

Click to expand...

That is not true. Lepanto was not a coalition of a few Italian city states, it was a coalition of a few Italian city states plus the entire Spanish navy.

Also, by the time of Lepanto, Barbarossa was dead, and the Ottomans for some reason appointed two commanding admirals, destroying the unity of command that was the usual outstanding Ottoman advantage.

Further, the Ottoman navy was not obliterated, just defeated. Within a year it was rebuilt and at full fighting strength.

Otranto was occupied only once, by Mehmed in the last year of his life. His successor had other priorities and did not continue the attack.

I am astonished at how incredibly you overrate the military capabilities of the Italian city-states. Mercenary armies were accustomed to chess matches that involved little actual combat. They would have little enthusiasm for a brutal engagement with the Ottoman army at its height.

President Ledyard said:

I have to agree that no matter how big the Ottomans get, there's simply not much reason for them to launch ships into the unknown if they're sitting astride the main east-west trade routes. There's also the fact that the most fertile areas abutting the eastern side of Atlantic are overwhelming located in northwestern Europe.

I think an Ottoman Australia is rather more likely myself, since as one poster noted, if they want spices, all they really have to do is catch the monsoon to the East Indies.

Click to expand...

You forget that in this TL, the Ottomans have taken a more Westerly route than in OTL. The absorption of Italy and Iberia will radically alter the nature of the empire.

Once again we are running into the creative roadblock of considering the Ottoman Empire a Turkish state, when it was not. One of Mehmed II's first acts upon the conquest of Constantinople was to have the Patriarch crown him Roman Emperor, and the addition of Italy and Spain will increase the inclination of the Ottomans to consider themselves the heirs of Rome.

Plus, the same mercants and explorers with the same interests will still be around, with the same impetus for discovering new routes, it will just be as Ottoman subjects, instead of Spanish or Portuguese.