An Age of Miracles Continues: The Empire of Rhomania

Rome couldn't control Mesopotamia when it was the most dominant power in Western Eurasia, I'm really doubtful a Rome with peer competitors could succeed where they failed, especially with a population that has pretty good reason to be fiercely hostile.
 
Last edited:
Mesopotamia is so valuable precisely because it is the most densely populated part of the Ottoman Empire and because it is the one part where you can make major use of water transport; Tigris and Euphrates; with all the efficiencies that entails. Baghdad is the largest city in the empire and I have no doubt that Mosul and Basra and 2 of the top 15 if not top 10.

Rome will almost certainly take northern Mesopotamia and the trans-arras lands and ethnically cleanse them along with interior Levant. It will take 100 years to get just that relatively small part back up to anything resembling their pre-war populations. Economically perhaps 75years because it will be settled with loyal Romans rather than unruly minorities who will be cheaper to administer and more willing to pay taxes and contribute to the empire. Imagine how long it would take to do that to all of Mesopotamia. It would still be ongoing today. Rome has made or is in the process of making the decision to have a net drain on the finances for the next 2-3 generations because it will benefit them in the long term. The thought that they would make that same decision for the next 15 is pure fallacy. It would permanently impoverish Rome to try to repopulate that much land all at once and thats assuming the Ottomans don't start anymore wars or fund raiders or just close the straights of Hormuz. What's the point of Basra if a Roman flotilla is sunk on sight whenever they leave the harbour.

On the possibility of an Arab or Turkish Despotate. Given the history as presented its not going to happen. The Romans consider the Arabs essentially anti-Romans at this point. Multiple passages throughout the timeline have shown that Arabs are considered untrustworthy and unreliable. They are literally going to be ethnically cleansing them from large parts of the Levant and northern Mesopatamia while also setting up a country for them??? As for a Turkish despotate it would require the Romans to somehow get past the shared animosity that spans centuries at this point and once again put a hated enemy in a position of power.

Even assuming Rome is able to set up a despotate what is the advantage. This isn't EU4 where everyone just becomes loyal to the new ruler as long as he is the right ethnicity and once a truce happens there is a severe stability hit that prevents a new war from happening very often if it is broken. Rome would need to station so many troops in the area that they might as well annex it outright. Any troops they raise from the despotate would never be trusted and would be worse than useless. How could you put even 5,000 troops in the line of battle facing the Ottomans and not need 10,000 just to watch them and make sure they don't turn traitor at the first opportunity.

TLDR: Mesopotamia is a bridge too far for Rome. Even Mosul and Levant is going to require generations to heal from this war. Annexing is impossible due to hostile population or pointless since killing the population robs it of it's worth. Despotate would never be stable and would be a massive drain on Roman power.
 
That’s why the Roman strategy should be as it was in past wars, with better execution. To loot and burn their way down to Basra, temporarily occupy the whole region, and return the husk to the Ottomans in return for a massive amount yearly in tribute.
 
I wonder if, in the possible future, the empire manages to produce an atheist Emperor, it would be interesting to see how things would develop with an atheist leading Rhomania, they might have to hide their lack of faith to make sure they won't get in trouble though.
 
So what happened to the muslim world in this tl?

Islam is still prevalent in W. & N. Africa, U. Egypt, E. Africa, Syria, Arabia, Mesopotamia, Iran, N. India, Malaysia. Smatterings of communities in S. Spain, Sicily, and far east Anatolia. The Black Rock is held by the Marinids after Rome sacked Mecca, and gave it to them.

It is in an interesting position in the politics of the world, a strong eastern Orthodox power wary of the Latin west, leaves the Muslim middle east a wildcard 'ally' for some.
 

Cryostorm

Monthly Donor
Surely the muslims would have wanted to avenge this?
Maybe, but it actually wouldn't be the first time Mecca has been sacked, though usually by of Islamic states. Also as just demonstrated Rhomania just handily took on the strongest Muslim powers in the east and walked away with a draw while it was distracted by an even bigger war in the west.

It is part of the reason that Arab Muslims have been such a thorn and Rhomania's has decided they have had enough.
 
Wait does bzyantine now rule hedjaz?

Have you read the story so far? Rhomania doesn't control the Hejaz, the Black Stone was taken in a punitive raid-in-force and turned over to the Marinids to curry favor with them and antagonize the Ottomans, who had previously attempted to control the area in a bid to become the dominant Muslim power. I forget the exact attitudes they have towards their neighbors, but an Arab Sharif currently controls the Holy Cities and broader Hejaz.

When did the muslims all of suddan not become a match for byzantine?

It's not an 'all of a sudden' thing, the story as it is is 450 years post-POD, and there have been numerous ups and downs, wars and alliances, and long-term geopolitical trends affecting relations between the Romans and the various Muslim powers. The Muslim states (Ottomans, Marinids, Andalusi, Idwaits, etc.) have always had their own differences and agendas, and have disagreed with each other just as much as the Christian states in Europe and the Middle East have.
 

Cryostorm

Monthly Donor
When did the Muslims all of sudden not become a match for byzantine?
There are only two major Muslim realms at this point the Marinids of North and West Africa and the Ottomans in Persia, Mesopotamia, Central Asia and western India, as opposed to OTL's three of the Ottomans, Persians, and Mughals, along with a few minor realms, such as the Idwaits and the Omani. The Marinids were at war with Spain to protect Andalusia, who had rebelled in favor of Spanish takeover pretty much, while the Omani are semi-allied to Rhomania.

Also remember that at this point in history the Ottomans were at a similar period of strength and only really declined due to shifting trade routes as well as bureaucratic ossification compounded with a rather unique, and ultimately poor, method of selecting the next heir, both of which Rhomania has nipped in the bud which means that instead of becoming the sick man over the next three hundred years it should stay strong, especially since Russia is both friendly and not unified.

Interestingly this may ensure that the Ottomans and Marinids also avoid their fates as they work to match their enemies instead of resting on their laurels until it is too late.
 
Interestingly this may ensure that the Ottomans and Marinids
It still doesn't change the fact they don't seem to be a match for byzantine as they sacked mecca. When the sauds did it they destroyed there state in retaliation. They lost the levant and egypt and allowed the holy sites to be sacked thats they are not strong.
 
It still doesn't change the fact they don't seem to be a match for byzantine as they sacked mecca. When the sauds did it they destroyed there state in retaliation. They lost the levant and egypt and allowed the holy sites to be sacked thats they are not strong.

In this story, the Ottomans never had Egypt, the Holy Cities, or the Levant, as they only gained those territories OTL centuries after the POD. They were pushed out of Anatolia TTL in the 13th or early 14th century into Mesopotamia, and have been expanding mostly eastward since then.
 
It still doesn't change the fact they don't seem to be a match for byzantine as they sacked mecca. When the sauds did it they destroyed there state in retaliation. They lost the levant and egypt and allowed the holy sites to be sacked thats they are not strong.
Sorry but do you have a point? You're making assertions that don't mean anything for the period of time this is in and don't seem to be listening to information users are providing you. Yes Mecca was sacked, yes the Muslim world isn't as strong as it was IOTL, no they didn't just sit around when the Black Stone was stolen there was a major jihad about it and Rhomania suffered horribly, no it isn't back in Mecca it went to the Marinids in Morocco because the Empress in Constantinople didn't want the Ottomans to be seen as Caliph, it has been a long time since then and borders are currently being pushed back to pre-Mecca sacking days but not without significant difficulty.

This timeline is in the 17th century, the most recent updates dealing with the 1630s, and had its original start in the early 13th century. Things have changed over that significant period of time and you clearly haven't read the timeline. If you want further answers and want to have a good reading experience, go read it because this is a very good timeline and will provide much better answers than anything you'll get from us.
 
Sorry yeah looking over what i posted got weird. Sorry for wasting everyone here time, just wanted to know what the muslim world was like in this tl. I was reading too much into the messages (thought they were definite answers). Sorry again didn't mean to offend anyone just literally wanted to know what the muslim world looked like.
 
Sorry yeah looking over what i posted got weird. Sorry for wasting everyone here time, just wanted to know what the muslim world was like in this tl. I was reading too much into the messages (thought they were definite answers). Sorry again didn't mean to offend anyone just literally wanted to know what the muslim world looked like.
Eh it’s fine. You’re good.
 
Top