Persia was a natural enemy of the Ottoman Empire so I see one possible scenario:
Napoleon, during his bid for Egypt, tries to secure an alliance with Persia. While a military backwater, having Persia and the Ottomans duke it out would allow him to capture Egypt with less casualties. Intrigued, the Shaw (I believe that was the Persian title for king) sends one of his sons to negotiate with Napoleon. Whether or not such an alliance goes through is immaterial. the important point is that the Persian prince is impressed with technology of the west. Skip a few years to the Shaw dying and this prince taking the throne. He then goes on to pull a Peter the Great with Persia.
...Persia seizing Mesopotamia and the Persian Gulf Coast of the Arabian peninsula including Bahrein - and keeping the Caucasus territory, leaving Persia in possession of the vast majority of the world's oil reserves. With less Russian pressure, Persia manages to reform, expands over time in Central Asia and Afghanistan, and as a result, by the 20th c controls something like this
Also, what would a stronger Persia in the 19th century mean for (probably) British India?
Makes sense. One concern I have with those borders is a rather 20th century one... Are there enough self-identified Persians in that state? That's a non-trivial share of Arabs, Kurds, etc. Not to suggest the country couldn't be more or less successfully multiethnic, but seems like a potential weakness if not handled carefully.
Also, what would a stronger Persia in the 19th century mean for (probably) British India?
As said though not Perisan Tajiks and some other central asians are very close.
I've a few Persian friends and I remember we once watched a film in Tajik- they understood it pretty well without the subtitles. Seems to be like the Scandinavian languages.
As said though not Perisan Tajiks and some other central asians are very close.
I've a few Persian friends and I remember we once watched a film in Tajik- they understood it pretty well without the subtitles. Seems to be like the Scandinavian languages.
Interesting, I'd like to see a TL come out of this. I don't recall reading anything about a Persia that manages to become a major power in the modern era.If we take your scenario, use butterflies to kill off Mahmud II, leaving no heir to the House of Osman, and perhaps a more successful outcome to Napoleon's Russian campaign, you could end up with Persia seizing Mesopotamia and the Persian Gulf Coast of the Arabian peninsula including Bahrein - and keeping the Caucasus territory, leaving Persia in possession of the vast majority of the world's oil reserves. With less Russian pressure, Persia manages to reform, expands over time in Central Asia and Afghanistan
I think it was in the 1830's and 40's they got there...I've heard the same thing about Urdu and Persian. Maybe what is today Pakistan end up becoming a part of Persia or were British already too strong in the area?
I don't think Persia can get an african colony, at best a small coastal town in somalia and greater economic influence in east africa.
Interesting, I'd like to see a TL come out of this. I don't recall reading anything about a Persia that manages to become a major power in the modern era.
Well, could concern over British colonial expansion from India lead to attempts to modernize, perhaps with French assistance?The problem is that at the turn of the 19th c, Persia was as bad a basket case as the Ottomans, but didn't ever have a reform movement. Persia has even worse problems to overcome when it comes to communications than the Ottomans, and it's also further from exposure to capitalism, so its chances of success are even more limited - I really don't know where to begin. It might require a Great Leader of some sort.