AHC: wank medieval Armenia

The Byzantines did a lot of large-scale population transfers within the empire to put minorities in useful places, accomplished both by encouragement and by force. Armenian Cilicia got its start in just that fashion. One possible way of creating an "Armenia" in another, more strategically viable location is simply to come up with a reason as to why a Byzantine Emperor would decide to move a whole lot of Armenians there. That might be cheating, though.

One possible way to aggrandize Armenian Cilicia a bit might be a dynastic union between Cilicia and Antioch, such that a prince of one manages to inherit the other and make good his claim. They were, after all, frequently allies. Antioch-Cilicia is not exactly superpower material, but it might qualify as an independent regional power given some reasonably proficient leadership and a flexible interpretation of the phrase "regional power."

What about, say, simultaneously with Cilicia growing in power and territory, the Byzantines manage to simultaneously push east as well, where they essentially create a buffer state in the Armenian Highlands that is loyal to them, while Cilicia proper tends to beholden to the Crusaders? Perhaps have it falter a bit to the Mongols, then come back as the important state that controls the passes west and east. And, with all of that done, Cilicia and Upper Armenia eventually reunite during modernish times under nationalistic forces
 
Armenia definitely be a power in the Mid East. It requires the First crusade coupled with Byzantium retaking even more if the east. The absence of the Abbasid power base is the prerequisite for all of this mind you, everything else can be dealt with by defending from kingdoms from Kurdistan and Iran.
 
Armenia definitely be a power in the Mid East. It requires the First crusade coupled with Byzantium retaking even more if the east. The absence of the Abbasid power base is the prerequisite for all of this mind you, everything else can be dealt with by defending from kingdoms from Kurdistan and Iran.

This would be easier with no Turks in Anatolia, right? Would a "no/unsuccessful Seljuks" TL be able to pull this off? That would be an interesting TL IMO
 
This would be easier with no Turks in Anatolia, right? Would a "no/unsuccessful Seljuks" TL be able to pull this off? That would be an interesting TL IMO


Well with the crusades, they and Byzantium can simply overwhelm the Turks in Anatolia demographically. Any Turks that remain will convert or remain a minority. Let us not forget, that rural Europe has a larger population than the lands of Islam. If a serious undertaking is made, with no great schism of 1054, there is always the possibility of migration being used combined with hundreds of technical crusading western vassals of Byzantium pushing back the Turks far enough to excavate Armenia from its conquest under the states of Islam.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Well with the crusades, they and Byzantium can simply overwhelm the Turks in Anatolia demographically. Any Turks that remain will convert or remain a minority. Let us not forget, that rural Europe has a larger population than the lands of Islam. If a serious undertaking is made, with no great schism of 1054, there is always the possibility of migration being used combined with hundreds of technical crusading western vassals of Byzantium pushing back the Turks far enough to excavate Armenia from its conquest under the states of Islam.

John775, a little tangent for you. You've often noted that there was no way in early Islam for a Kingdom to convert to Islam without submitting politically to the Caliph. Eventually that stricture ended. When did it end? 922, or earlier or later?
 
John775, a little tangent for you. You've often noted that there was no way in early Islam for a Kingdom to convert to Islam without submitting politically to the Caliph. Eventually that stricture ended. When did it end? 922, or earlier or later?

It depends. In terms of formalities, Muslim nations post 1258 ceased with formalities with the Abbasid throne. As well, the Buyyid and Saljuq dominions had their effects at eroding this. Including the Saffarids and Tulunids. Both of which, failed, as the Abbasid neutralized both opponents and afterward neutralized the Zanj, Khawarij and Qarmatians before being pushed back from Anatolia by Byzantium and its subsequent period of subjugation under the Buyyid hegemony. However, formalities continued between Muslim states proclaiming fealty to the Abbasid throne. The Ghaznavids and Ghurids technically referred to themselves as vassals of Abbasid throne.
 

ben0628

Banned
Armenia definitely be a power in the Mid East. It requires the First crusade coupled with Byzantium retaking even more if the east. The absence of the Abbasid power base is the prerequisite for all of this mind you, everything else can be dealt with by defending from kingdoms from Kurdistan and Iran.

Isn't Georgia on the rise by the first crusade? Can't see Armenia prospering if that's the case.

This would be easier with no Turks in Anatolia, right? Would a "no/unsuccessful Seljuks" TL be able to pull this off? That would be an interesting TL IMO

Wouldn't no Turks equal much stronger Byzantines though? That's just as unbeneficial as the Turks existing
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
It depends. In terms of formalities, Muslim nations post 1258 ceased with formalities with the Abbasid throne. As well, the Buyyid and Saljuq dominions had their effects at eroding this. Including the Saffarids and Tulunids. Both of which, failed, as the Abbasid neutralized both opponents and afterward neutralized the Zanj, Khawarij and Qarmatians before being pushed back from Anatolia by Byzantium and its subsequent period of subjugation under the Buyyid hegemony. However, formalities continued between Muslim states proclaiming fealty to the Abbasid throne. The Ghaznavids and Ghurids technically referred to themselves as vassals of Abbasid throne.

How was the conversion of the Volga Bulgars in 922 AD possible if fealty to the Abbasids remained so important when it occurred? Was there a point before 900 AD or so where fealty was not enough, the Caliphate was going to directly administer the living shit out converted areas?
 
How was the conversion of the Volga Bulgars in 922 AD possible if fealty to the Abbasids remained so important when it occurred? Was there a point before 900 AD or so where fealty was not enough, the Caliphate was going to directly administer the living shit out converted areas?

They did have nominal fealty, or at least the Abbasids claimed them. That being said, this was post Abbasid decline in the 870s, so it is not too surprising to see states like this arise.

I have answered this question in greater detail here before, perhaps refer to those posts using the search.
 
Top