AHC: Mamluk Egypt not conquered by Ottomans

[raharris1973]

The challenge is to have the Mamluk Egyptian state not be conquered by the Ottomans as it was in 1517, and indeed remain free of conquest by any outsiders until at least the year 1700.

One can nibble around the edges, but Egypt stays its own thing at a minimum.

In your response to the challenge for instance, the Mamluks might keep their entire empire in its 1500 boundaries, or they may lose non-Egyptian parts like Syria or Syria-Palestine.

 

[Koprulu Mustafa Pasha]

The challenge is to have the Mamluk Egyptian state not be conquered by the Ottomans as it was in 1517, and indeed remain free of conquest by any outsiders until at least the year 1700.

One can nibble around the edges, but Egypt stays its own thing at a minimum.

In your response to the challenge for instance, the Mamluks might keep their entire empire in its 1500 boundaries, or they may lose non-Egyptian parts like Syria or Syria-Palestine.

Selim I continues his Persian campaign. That will take some years. Mamluks have then the time to think "modernisation ain't bad you know". Because when Selim dies it will be Suleiman going for Egypt.

 

[raharris1973]

Have you ever seen any good maps of Selim's campaigns?

Did he just fight the Persians in eastern Anatolia ( basically Kurdistan and greater Armenia) and then suddenly stop and decide to turn south?

The alternative is for him to keep going east onto the Iranian plateau?

 

[Lucius Verus]

Have someone put an end to the Mamluk factions once in for all by replacing them with an indigenous trained force. The Mamluks by then were parasitic, intensely disloyal requiring constant bribes, and conducted themselves in the manner of robber knights raiding and extorting citizens in Cairo.

Or avoid the disastrous reign of An-Nasir Faraj in 1399 that crippled the Mamluks for decades while the Ottoman empire recovered from Timur and civil war. Not explicitly his fault as he came into power at the tender age of 13 when plague, Timur, famine, revolts, and general anarchy struck the Mamluks for over a decade and reduced the population to 30% of pre-crisis levels. Near the end of his reign he did turn oppressive, but that was the result more of a young boy being place in a position of power in a terrible time.

Then again plague and famine struck again in 1430 and it seems to suggest something wrong with agriculture, climate, grain storage, and/or transportation.

 

[Miguel Lanius]

Not explicitly his fault as he came into power at the tender age of 13 when plague, Timur, famine, revolts, and general anarchy struck the Mamluks for over a decade and reduced the population to 30% of pre-crisis levels.

Men, what a bunch of wusses. Georgia had like ten times the case of Timur they had, I'm surprised Georgia is still a thing

 

[Koprulu Mustafa Pasha]

Men, what a bunch of wusses. Georgia had like ten times the case of Timur they had, I'm surprised Georgia is still a thing

Georgia got away with it most times by being a vassal. Neither Timur, nor the Safavids or Ottomans really desired the lands until Russia showed up.

 

[Koprulu Mustafa Pasha]

Have you ever seen any good maps of Selim's campaigns?

Did he just fight the Persians in eastern Anatolia ( basically Kurdistan and greater Armenia) and then suddenly stop and decide to turn south?

The alternative is for him to keep going east onto the Iranian plateau?

Selim was already in Tabriz and was motivated to move forward in Persia to crush the Qizilbash. But the millitary was fed up with it and refused to go any further. They went as far as shooting at Selims tent.

 

[raharris1973]

Selim was already in Tabriz and was motivated to move forward in Persia to crush the Qizilbash. But the millitary was fed up with it and refused to go any further. They went as far as shooting at Selims tent.

Were the soldiers just sick of it because mountains were getting high, temperature was getting cold, and loot was getting scarce?

Did they tolerate the anti-Mamluk campaigns because they Mamluks were easier to fight, had more to steal, and it was not as cold?

 

[Koprulu Mustafa Pasha]

Were the soldiers just sick of it because mountains were getting high, temperature was getting cold, and loot was getting scarce?

Did they tolerate the anti-Mamluk campaigns because they Mamluks were easier to fight, had more to steal, and it was not as cold?

A combination of lenght of time the campaign takes/would take, the Safavids using scorched earth, and ofcourse the less amount of loot to take.