AHC/PC/WI: Germanic/Balto-Slavic/Gallo-Romance Middle East and North Africa

Albert.Nik

Banned
In this thread,we would discuss the possibilities of a Germanic/Balto-Slavic/Gallo-Romance conquest plus domination by long lasting and large settlements and rule in the Middle East. Have nation and people of these nations looking like France,Spain,Germany,Austria,Spain,England,Slovenia,Czech republic,Slovakia,Lithuania,Latvia,etc. You can choose the nations and the similar population. Don't exceed three countries in entire North Africa and Middle East. Region of effect should be from Iraq to Morocco. You can have significant linguistic minorities. But as a whole,keep the nations fairly homogeneous except language. Keep the population of Europe same genetically and in number. But you can redraw the borders. POD can be flexible but best is during the Germanic and Slavic migrations. Romans were also significantly Gallo-Italic or Italo-Celtic so they can fit too. So make this ME-NA(from Iraq to Morocco) as an extension of Europe as it was in the Antiquity and later have it with the same religion of the Western European kingdoms with significant changes in Christianity with a mix of Sufi Islam,Zoroastrianism and a mix from Germanic/Slavic/Italic/Celtic/Egyptian Pagan religions. No other religions. You would need to have significantly large settlements to affect the History and the population decisively. Let's also do all the plausibility checks. If you want,you could also affect parts of Iran.

As I said in other threads,let's discuss the possibilities and ways history,society and religions could evolve. Don't unnecessarily try to make it look unacceptable and I well know how to post without making anything unacceptable.
 
Last edited:
There are small Gallo-Italic communities in Sicily which date to the Middle Ages. So small communities like that (or the similar Catalan of Sardinia) could easily exist in North Africa assuming local depopulation and the rulers (like the Sicilians) importing settlers from elsewhere. But otherwise it's too big, too rich, and too inhabited of a region for anything larger than small communities. Large-scale linguistic replacement would take a major empire like Carthage (although Punic spread as much under Rome as Carthage), Rome, or the Caliphate to accomplish, and Germanic and Slavic empires around the Mediterranean would invariably be extremely Romanised.

Best would be Malta, Lampedusa, and other small islands in that area. That's technically North Africa, and were also uninhabited several times in history, including in Late Antiquity (IMO this was the best chance for Punic to survive to this day). A larger number of Vandals in North Africa could mean some Vandalic settlement of those islands, and assuming the area remains stable (recall that the Arabic dialect of Pantellaria, related to Maltese, went extinct by the 19th century), means you now have an East Germanic language spoken on some islands by a few hundred thousand people in the modern age.

Anything else would take a POD in the early years of the Roman Republic so thus result in an unrecognisable world.

Romans were also significantly Gallo-Italic or Italo-Celtic so they can fit too

I don't understand, this is OTL, right down to the development of an indigenous Romance language and its relation/influence on Iberian, Sardinian, and Sicilian Romance languages. Even with a 7th century, post-Islamic POD, it isn't hard to imagine all of North Africa west of Cyrenaica speaking a Romance language (albeit rather unlikely), and an earlier POD (like Trajan or another emperor going after the unconquered parts of Mauretania) would definitely make it more likely all of North Africa ends up speaking a Romance language as its dominant tongue, although I think in both cases, you'd have the Berbers end up like the Scottish clans and play a major part in the political history of those nations (I suspect the military aristocracy would be led by Berbers). Some Berbers would assimilate over the centuries, but a large number of them likely wouldn't, even with policies similar to what France did in Occitania and Brittany and the British did in the Highlands, Wales, and Ireland.

But for appearance North Africans wouldn't look too different, since most are still "Berber" in stock (and some sub-Saharan ancestry would certainly be present, since no way in hell would they not be involved in trade with West African, including the slave trade). The more "Arab" looking North Africans would be a bit more rare than OTL, and instead would be replaced with North Africans who resemble Sicilians or Andalusians and such.
 
Early Roman and Indo-European timelines not precluded. You can also have those.

Then you have a TL where the "Southern Roman Empire", based in Carthage (it will likely conquer Rome at some point, but at that point, Rome is a mere regional town as it was in the 5th century and it's on the frontier so Carthage will stay the capital), is a major player. It's main enemies (or allies, depends) are whatever emerges out of the Germanic tribes in the north, the Eastern Roman Empire, the Arabs, and the Persians. The natural borders of this state are the Pyrenees (with the French Riviera), somewhere in northern Italy (maybe the Po River), the Balkan Coast, Eastern Anatolia, and the Zagros Mountains to the north/east, while to the south the borders are the Sahara Desert (probably instead called "Chenara" or something similar via a Berber loan instead of an Arab loan), the cataracts of the Nile, and the Syrian Desert. It would be a Romano-Berber state, much as the Frankish Empire fused Roman and Germanic influences, but I'd like to imagine that such a state could have more legitimacy via a Roman (like one of the Exarchs of Africa) ruler--the possibilities are endless via an earlier TL. My favourite TL for North Africa involves a Roman emperor conquering the rest of Mauretania (down to the Anti-Atlas Mountains at least, but ideally that too would later be conquered), leading to trade with the Canaries increased (basically leading to the Canaries becoming a "Hiberia" to the Mauretanian "Brittania"). At some point, the Canarian plant tagasaste comes to North Africa, making pastoralism (and agriculture in general) stronger and helping fight desertification/misuse of agricultural land. This could possibly extend pastoralism into lands unsuitable for it. Of course, it helps in Spain too. The Canarians themselves develop as good vassal states to Rome and end up pretty Romanised like other peoples on the periphery of Rome did.

With North Africa bigger and wealthier, it plays more of an influence in Roman politics (we'll assume things end up similar, like Rome still becomes Christian). The church in Carthage is perhaps more influential. Regardless, this all paves the way for a Southern Roman Empire. If the Vandals (say) conquer North Africa, then they could easily play the role the Franks did in Europe, right down to their homeland being named for them, like how "Gaul" is now "France", while "Africa [Proconsularis]" could be either "Vandalia", "Bandalia" (via known African Romance sound shifts) or "Andalia" (via a reborrowing of "Vandalia" from Berber). They'd be less numerous than the Franks were in Gaul, but you might have a high nobility of Vandals (who like OTL, assimilate quickly, with the main influence being mostly a few common personal names and maybe a toponym or loanword or two) and a lower nobility of Berbers and some remaining Roman elites.

Although no matter how the Southern Roman Empire evolves, it will likely have a lot of internal conflicts, especially with the Copts and Syriacs (who will likely benefit big time from them, if the Byzantines are their enemy--might as well phase out Greek and either do everything in Latin, or better yet, use the middle class/religious class and use Egyptian and Aramaic). In Europe local nobles could undermine them, as well as Papal politics (if the Pope is a puppet of the Southern Roman Empire or his Patriarch of Carthage, then imagine the power of the Antipope), and maybe you could have both a "Reconquista" from both Spain and Italy. A Romano-Berber Empire is huge for how medieval Europe evolves and how Christianity develops, so it could go in any direction.

As for the long term, I imagine that Romano-Berber North Africa (uniting either all of North Africa or just whoever rules coastal Mauretania from either Volubilis, Tingis, or Casablanca) could end up like Spain or Portugal and be keen sailors and colonialists. Brazil, South Africa, Australia, and the Southern Cone would be key targets for their colonialism, and perhaps create nations stronger than them (South Africa could evolve similarly to both Brazil and Argentina, albeit with less depopulation of natives). But they'd be similar to Spain in that Mauretania would likely be fighting in Spain, Africa/"Vandalia", etc. as well as dealing with sub-Saharan Africans, Native Americans, Asians, Australian Aboriginals. Of course, you could unite Africa and Mauretania and focus them toward colonialism (not a given--look how 16th-18th century France OTL focused on their European wars instead of long-term benefit in the Americas, Asia, etc.) instead of their no doubt numerous wars against Italian and Iberian powers and whoever else is in the Mediterranean, but at this point this just shows the many potential ways this scenario goes.
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
Well,North Africa is not much fertile. That could be one problem and could happen only as a side effect of a transformed ME. But as far as Middle East is concerned,I think it is possible. A considerable Roman(Italo-Celtic) settlement first with significant connection and assimilation with many natives and then being invaded and settled by Germanic/Slavic invaders and becoming like the France/Spain/England/Italy/Portugal like in an alternate timeline. Or a larger Hellenic/Greek/Anatolian settlement could achieve this later with the Roman Empire as well. IMO,Levant and Mesopotamia could end up looking like French or Spanish people in this timeline with a segment of the population looking more like Germans/Brits/Russians/Other Slavs/Albanians. Gulf states would be as they are but maybe different in influences.
 
Romance is easy, I was thinking about a Celtic, Galatian-like, migration into North Africa during the Classical Age, maybe a big Greek-Carthaginian conflict has Celtic mercenaries end up in North Africa? That's possible IMHO, but it would be just the starting step.

In any case I think the better OTL period in history to look at would be the early modern era, France had like 2-3 times the population of either the entirety of North Africa or just the Maghreb(excluding just Egypt basically), this shows a big demographic imbalance that could lead to an effective assimilation of North African communities by states of any given ethnicity around the northern mediterranean region, although I'm not sure that pre-modern(even early modern) states really would benefit from large populations at home if the populations can't be mobilized to settle oversea land, I mean the Romans did but at the same time Italy did not exactly enjoy a demographic advatange over other regions, nor did it really overwhelm local populations with settlers either.

Germanic and Slavic is quite harder, not impossible, but it would involve more steps in between and honestly for Slavic the challenge is getting Slavs in Anatolia and in the open mediterranean coast to begin with.
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
As for Germanic(at least by Ancestry),I think a Carolingian or Gothic Empire reconquering the whole Erstwhile Western Roman Empire which would involve conquering and bringing some West and North Germanic lands and peoples into this revamped Germano-Roman Empire,conquering Italia as a whole and rebuilding the city of Rome with all it's classical buildings and infrastructure,rebuild the society of the Classical Rome with the new large Germanic population base,multiply in number in this new renaissance and stability and creating some kind of religion that would have less conflicts(mix of Pagan Religions+some amount of Christianity+classical Philosophies) and then North Africa would be a cakewalk and Middle East too(irrespective of Arabs invade or if it is still Byzantine ruled) and then you could arrive at a similar result. I think even with this large Germanic and Gallo-Germano-Italic settlements and expansion,North Africa and Levant could get that characteristic population like England or France or Germany. Egypt could end with a 60% or so on either sides which could end both ways but if we have a stable social scenario with the stable governance and hence religious environment,I could see Egypt becoming a Nation with hybrid culture and predominantly Germanic and Gallo-Romance Ancestry with significant Egyptian ancestry too. Egypt needs a very strong,peaceful and a stable Govt and Society to have this result which is why I think the first few Caliphates(the good ones like Fatimid,Abbasid) were successful. We can have an Germanic/Gallo-Romance equivalent of a good,peaceful and a stable rule that the Fatimid or Abbasid Arab Empires provided and could end up with this result. Same with Iraq and Mesopotamia almost.

The Key to this Germanic wank is having a tolerant,peaceful and an inclusive religion and Social norms.
 
As for Germanic(at least by Ancestry),I think a Carolingian or Gothic Empire reconquering the whole Erstwhile Western Roman Empire which would involve conquering and bringing some West and North Germanic lands and peoples into this revamped Germano-Roman Empire,conquering Italia as a whole and rebuilding the city of Rome with all it's classical buildings and infrastructure,rebuild the society of the Classical Rome with the new large Germanic population base,multiply in number in this new renaissance and stability and creating some kind of religion that would have less conflicts(mix of Pagan Religions+some amount of Christianity+classical Philosophies) and then North Africa would be a cakewalk and Middle East too(irrespective of Arabs invade or if it is still Byzantine ruled) and then you could arrive at a similar result. I think even with this large Germanic and Gallo-Germano-Italic settlements and expansion,North Africa and Levant could get that characteristic population like England or France or Germany. Egypt could end with a 60% or so on either sides which could end both ways but if we have a stable social scenario with the stable governance and hence religious environment,I could see Egypt becoming a Nation with hybrid culture and predominantly Germanic and Gallo-Romance Ancestry with significant Egyptian ancestry too. Egypt needs a very strong,peaceful and a stable Govt and Society to have this result which is why I think the first few Caliphates(the good ones like Fatimid,Abbasid) were successful. We can have an Germanic/Gallo-Romance equivalent of a good,peaceful and a stable rule that the Fatimid or Abbasid Arab Empires provided and could end up with this result. Same with Iraq and Mesopotamia almost.

The Key to this Germanic wank is having a tolerant,peaceful and an inclusive religion and Social norms.
A Carolingian or Gothic empire would be more Gallo- or Italo-Roman with some Germanic than fully Germanic, for Germanic you would need maybe to have some very specific pods surrounding a lack of any Roman empire or an early collapse, possibly some specific PODs to have Germanic groups assimilate good portions of the core area.
 

Baby Kata

Banned
Anything else would take a POD in the early years of the Roman Republic so thus result in an unrecognisable world.

Or a European Colonial government willing to implement something akin to Generalplan Ost against the native people, which is obviously not a desirable outcome.
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
Or a European Colonial government willing to implement something akin to Generalplan Ost against the native people, which is obviously not a desirable outcome.
We're looking for an early POD. Like Indo-European migrations,Roman Empire,alternate agricultural and social developments. So this isn't relevant.
 

Baby Kata

Banned
We're looking for an early POD. Like Indo-European migrations,Roman Empire,alternate agricultural and social developments. So this isn't relevant.

But the population of the MENA region was so high after the Arab conquest that the only way to get a European demographic majority in the area is by expelling or killing most of the people there, or forcing all Europeans to have a dozen kids and send half of them.
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
But the population of the MENA region was so high after the Arab conquest that the only way to get a European demographic majority in the area is by expelling or killing most of the people there, or forcing all Europeans to have a dozen kids and send half of them.
We are focusing on timelines before the 8th-10th Century CE or around there.
 
Last edited:
But the population of the MENA region was so high after the Arab conquest that the only way to get a European demographic majority in the area is by expelling or killing most of the people there, or forcing all Europeans to have a dozen kids and send half of them.
I'm not so sure, the Middle East in the early modern era was anything but a demographic behemoth AFAIK, France had like about as many people as the Ottoman empire in 1800.

Iraq was quite depopulated during this period in particular.
 

Albert.Nik

Banned
I'm not so sure, the Middle East in the early modern era was anything but a demographic behemoth AFAIK, France had like about as many people as the Ottoman empire in 1800.

Iraq was quite depopulated during this period in particular.
Unpopulated/underpopulated is the right word,I think.

Overall,I think yes,since these are desert regions,the population density would be quite scattered and it would be easier for an Industrialized country(Britain,France,Germany,Other Western European countries mainly) to get a good foothold without too much interference with the locals. However,this isn't much related to the intent of this thread.
 

Baby Kata

Banned
I'm not so sure, the Middle East in the early modern era was anything but a demographic behemoth AFAIK, France had like about as many people as the Ottoman empire in 1800.

Iraq was quite depopulated during this period in particular.

The one time a European settler colony was actually tried in the MENA region (Algeria), it failed.
 
Unpopulated/underpopulated is the right word,I think.

Overall,I think yes,since these are desert regions,the population density would be quite scattered and it would be easier for an Industrialized country(Britain,France,Germany,Other Western European countries mainly) to get a good foothold without too much interference with the locals. However,this isn't much related to the intent of this thread.
Well you don't need near-complete population replacement to have a cultural/linguistic assimilation, even a settler population of 10% of the size of the local is quite a lot.
 
Top