AHC: Byzantine Empire With Modern Turkish Borders
- Thread starter Avitus
- Start date
I don't know hw they could do it without greece. I guess winning Manzikert but losing Armenia and Bulgaria to a rise in nationalism later on could fulfill part of it.
Greece was repopulated from Anatolia in one period, and if that does not happen, we have a western border of the postulated kind.
Deleted member 67076
Didn't the empire shortly after Basil have Turkey's borders, at least in Anatolia?
I suppose that instead of losing Anatolia, they could lose the Balkans. No idea on how that could happen.
Perhaps the Seljuks sweep through Europe like the Avars?
I suppose that instead of losing Anatolia, they could lose the Balkans. No idea on how that could happen.
Perhaps the Seljuks sweep through Europe like the Avars?
It is actually easier with a more successful empire, which later splits up, so that the western, "Greek" section is some other polity, while the eastern, "Turkish" section remains as the empire.
Greater Byzantine focus on the East in the tenth and eleventh centuries allows Bulgaria to consolidate her power in the Balkans, with the Byzantines reduced largely to coastal strongholds and Thrace. To balance this out, by the thirteenth century the Empire fully dominates the Caucasus and Fertile Crescent, and continues to hold these territories for centuries to come, with aggressive energy being directed largely towards wars with Egypt, Iran, and a powerful Bulgaria.
Sometime in the nineteenth century, Byzantine power goes into retreat, with rebellion breaking out in the Fertile Crescent, and defeats in foreign wars. A victorious coalition of Bulgaria and others takes large chunks out of the Byzantine state, including, most painfully Thessalonica. The state is pegged back to a rump, with borders on the Taurus Mountains in the east, and Thrace in the West. As a final humiliation, the Aegean Isles are given to Italian powers, and Cyprus is set up as an independent state.
Byzantium, though, is not down yet, and in the twentieth century, a partial resurgence takes place. Following a messy election, part of Cyprus opts to rejoin the Empire in a plebiscite, while imperial troops this time choose the right side in a major regional war and regain several important lost territories, notably Antioch, Melitene and Theodosiopolis, as well as the islands of Imbros and Tenedos.
The resulting state has boundaries very similar to those of modern Turkey.
Sometime in the nineteenth century, Byzantine power goes into retreat, with rebellion breaking out in the Fertile Crescent, and defeats in foreign wars. A victorious coalition of Bulgaria and others takes large chunks out of the Byzantine state, including, most painfully Thessalonica. The state is pegged back to a rump, with borders on the Taurus Mountains in the east, and Thrace in the West. As a final humiliation, the Aegean Isles are given to Italian powers, and Cyprus is set up as an independent state.
Byzantium, though, is not down yet, and in the twentieth century, a partial resurgence takes place. Following a messy election, part of Cyprus opts to rejoin the Empire in a plebiscite, while imperial troops this time choose the right side in a major regional war and regain several important lost territories, notably Antioch, Melitene and Theodosiopolis, as well as the islands of Imbros and Tenedos.
The resulting state has boundaries very similar to those of modern Turkey.
Hmmmm.... I think the Byzantine Empire in this scenario will include Greece as well. However, in my own opinion, the Kars-Ardahan region (or even Trebizond area) will be under Armenian rule, while Hatay will stay in Syria.
By the way, if this alternate Byzantine Empire continued into 20th century, will drachma be its currency? I just imagine that Elli Stai presented the news from Constantinople studios of the alternate ERT
By the way, if this alternate Byzantine Empire continued into 20th century, will drachma be its currency? I just imagine that Elli Stai presented the news from Constantinople studios of the alternate ERT
Why would that be so? Especially given that there's no reason for an independent Armenia in this scenario except to force it to modern Turkish borders.
Probably not, though it depends.
MarshalBraginsky
Banned
Wouldn't this require Simeon of Bulgaria conquering Constantinople or all of Thessaly for this to work? And Constantinople is very hard to conquer in an era where there is no gunpowder.
In your opinion, what would be the broadcasting industry in Byzantine Empire in this scenario?
Why wouldn't it? Leaving aside the strong ties of Armenians to the empire (they come up in Byzantine history like Scots in British imperial history), a Byzantine Empire with something like modern Turkish borders covers most of historical Armenia.
I don't have the foggiest idea.
birdboy2000
Banned
First Bulgarian Empire takes what we now call mainland Greece (they took a sizable chunk OTL) and manages to make it stick, but the Theodosian Walls and Byzantine naval supremacy keep them out of Constantinople and Anatolia, and a later dynasty makes modest gains at their expense to recover Turkish Thrace. Byzantines never retake Crete and Cyprus, however, which remain or become firm dependencies of other Arab powers with strong navies to protect them; I doubt the independent Emirate of Crete of OTL can hold on in the long run.
Byzantines get ejected from Cyprus by a stronger Caliphate, or if we choose to count the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus as Turkey (it's not officially, but in practice is heavily dependent on it) then maybe we can get a similar partition of the island, which historically was under joint Arab-Byzantine sovereignty.
I don't know, however, what to do with Rhodes and all those Greek islands in the Aegean. Their populations are Greek, so no nationalism to detach them, nor did any historic powers make a run at them until the Fourth Crusade. I guess if the Byzantine navy gets its ass kicked by someone uninterested in Constantinople, and the Bulgarians are by this time Christianized and friendly, they could be lost to a stronger Mediterranean naval power, such as Venice or one of the Barbary states (if their OTL culture of strong navies and piracy, which went hand in hand, isn't butterflied away - and if the Byzantine naval culture decays enough not to just build a new one and take them back if they do lose such a battle.)
I'm not sure how to get them Turkey's exact border in the east, however. Byzantines not only need to absorb Armenia (as OTL, but in this TL they'd be in a weaker position at this point - then again with so many Muslims nearby Byzantium could present itself as the lesser evil, and plenty of Armenians reached high places in the Byzantine Empire), but also conquer some parts of southeastern Turkey that were Islamicized fairly early on and seem a more natural fit for other states. To be sure, they'd be near the border, and military adventurism can accomplish many things... but the Byzantines seem to have more natural targets for adventurism elsewhere.
Byzantines get ejected from Cyprus by a stronger Caliphate, or if we choose to count the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus as Turkey (it's not officially, but in practice is heavily dependent on it) then maybe we can get a similar partition of the island, which historically was under joint Arab-Byzantine sovereignty.
I don't know, however, what to do with Rhodes and all those Greek islands in the Aegean. Their populations are Greek, so no nationalism to detach them, nor did any historic powers make a run at them until the Fourth Crusade. I guess if the Byzantine navy gets its ass kicked by someone uninterested in Constantinople, and the Bulgarians are by this time Christianized and friendly, they could be lost to a stronger Mediterranean naval power, such as Venice or one of the Barbary states (if their OTL culture of strong navies and piracy, which went hand in hand, isn't butterflied away - and if the Byzantine naval culture decays enough not to just build a new one and take them back if they do lose such a battle.)
I'm not sure how to get them Turkey's exact border in the east, however. Byzantines not only need to absorb Armenia (as OTL, but in this TL they'd be in a weaker position at this point - then again with so many Muslims nearby Byzantium could present itself as the lesser evil, and plenty of Armenians reached high places in the Byzantine Empire), but also conquer some parts of southeastern Turkey that were Islamicized fairly early on and seem a more natural fit for other states. To be sure, they'd be near the border, and military adventurism can accomplish many things... but the Byzantines seem to have more natural targets for adventurism elsewhere.
Last edited:
Yeah. In this scenario, Greek is pretty widely spoken by both the "Greeks" as we'd understand the term and the Armenians - I'm sure the Armenians keep their own tongue, because they were ornery mountainers like that (again, Scots) - but the Byzantine Empire's attitudes on citizenship make it pretty easy for an Armenian who wants get rich in the empire to be just another ambitious son of a gun.
Can't see that changing.
katchen
Banned
Mainland Greece could be Slavicized by Bulgaria or Serbia or even become part of a Greater Albania. So much of the Greek population did get slavicized in Macedonia anyway. Wheras the Aegean Islands could indeed be Italicized.
And yes, the Turks, deflected from the area north of the Taurus Mountains could well settle on the plain between Baghdad and Damascus even to the Levant, imposing their language on the population. Maybe even settle Palestine and Southern Iraq as well, leaving only North Africa and a disconnected Arabian Peninsula still Arabic speaking.
For that matter, any reason why the deflected Seljuks couldn't conquer and impose their language on Egypt the same way the Arabs did 600 years earlier?
And yes, the Turks, deflected from the area north of the Taurus Mountains could well settle on the plain between Baghdad and Damascus even to the Levant, imposing their language on the population. Maybe even settle Palestine and Southern Iraq as well, leaving only North Africa and a disconnected Arabian Peninsula still Arabic speaking.
For that matter, any reason why the deflected Seljuks couldn't conquer and impose their language on Egypt the same way the Arabs did 600 years earlier?
Numbers and prestige.
The Sljuks did not replace the population in Anatolia. They, and their successors, quite assimilated the local hellenized people. Conversion was probably the main vector of language change. The same conditions won't be there in Arabized countries where the local population is already mostly Muslim and speaks a language tied to Islam. Egypt was ruled by a largely Turkic elite for several centuries with limited impact on local Arabic (actually, said elite used Arabic as an official language in most cases).
I can see Turkification in Northern Iraq and Northern Syria, but probably not much beyond that, and even there, likely not complete.
Oh, I forgot about the situation of the Kurds (and
Zazaki people) in this scenario..
Zazaki people) in this scenario..
I'm not sure, but I think they were there before Manizkert (correct me if I'm wrong)