Yes! A Controversial Reformer! Nothing starts an ugly two round, 30 years world war, like the death of a Great Reformer!
An Age of Miracles Continues: The Empire of Rhomania
- Thread starter Basileus444
- Start date
Yes! A Controversial Reformer! Nothing starts an ugly two round, 30 years world war, like the death of a Great Reformer!
Why should Andreas go for such a massive reform, especially to push for empowering regional governments of all things?
Governmental functions, in the hands of uncultured country rubes? The horror!
The current arbitrary setup of city councils and mayors works well enough. Bigger reforms can wait until telegraphs come along. Y'know, when Constantinople's eyes and ears can keep constant watch over everything.
The current arbitrary setup of city councils and mayors works well enough. Bigger reforms can wait until telegraphs come along. Y'know, when Constantinople's eyes and ears can keep constant watch over everything.
Last edited:
Less government work, easier to control new conquests if they autonomy and he can use this as a way to keep the people happy with the empire but not happy with the provinces. The provinces will want their own taxes which will make people angry with them for paying more taxes for the province and not the imperial government.
Also by using this he can make Sicily a province and still give it the autonomy it in joys with out having unrest, he can also declare Greek the imperial language which every school has to teach and other subjects with but for different provinces there can be a second language which will keep people happy.
Also by using this he can make Sicily a province and still give it the autonomy it in joys with out having unrest, he can also declare Greek the imperial language which every school has to teach and other subjects with but for different provinces there can be a second language which will keep people happy.
Yeah, at which point the provinces immediately put the blame for all bad things on the Imperial Government but take credit for the good things. It's what happens in Scotland - I don't see why it wouldn't happen to the Romans.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think that sorting out some reforms would be good, but what you've described is basically the worst of the Empire and Despotates combined. IMO - the Emperor needs to bring the Despotates closer to the Empire, and use the Ottoman Empires issues (and future alliance) to give them the free hand to take out the Marinids and Idawit.
The Idawit are a stain on the Empire, and could (with help), interfere with Roman trade - and they are a potential thorn in the side of the Empire if they partnered with another force. Bringing the Despotate of Egypt under tighter control, and expanding down the Nile is good, especially if it guarantees a friendly border with Ethiopia again.
The Marinids just took Roman territory in Africa. The Marinids need to be punished, and destroyed once and for all - if only to ensure that the Romans can set up Atlantic ports and take the fight to the Triunes if they ever decide to mess with the Romans again. (Plus, a Marinid invasion could involve Arles, and I feel like we've not heard from them in a while, and a joint Roman-Arletian military operation could be useful). It also puts the Romans in the position of being able to benefit from the trade that side-tracks them around Egypt - and provide a base of operations in Europe if the Spanish-Portuguese get any funny ideas in the East Indies.
More likely, IMO - is that with Andreas being half-sicilian, is that Italy could be in the crosshairs. It could certainly put up a heck of a fight - but if hit hard, and offered the 'tightened-Despotate' status, it provides Sicily with increased security - and puts the Alps as the border between the Romans and Germans.
Then again, I'm entirely in love with the idea of an Indian invasion - I'm quite excited, given time to prepare, absolutely ANYTHING could happen under Andreas.
BOOOO!!! No one can defeat the Uber - Vijayanagara on land! Seriously, of the Iranians, they can keep an army on the field for a longer time necessary to dealt some defeats to Vijayanagara, but the Romans? How the hell are they going to keep an army so far from their core territories? It's not that they have loads of manpower in their Eastern colonies, which they can throw at Vijayanagara. And in any scenario, you can never defeat an Indian Empire by just blocakading it's coasts and be carefree, not in the Middle Ages; you will have to do a large land invasion and prosecute it till the end. India has just too many resources and we are talking about an Empire that has the entire South of the Vindhyas under its firm control and has just smacked the Iranians across the Indus, along with a seeming lack of any large scale internal threats that can destabilize it. So any downfall of Vijayanagara would have to come from internal dissension (which does not seem to be existing presently in any meaningful way aside from normal reminders to unruly vassals) , and the powers which can seriously challenge Vijayanagara are either setting their affairs right (China), recently beaten (Iran) or just too far away and whose nearby territories don't amount to much (Romans).
And anyway what's up with Swati Kashmir nowadays?
And what about Bengal and the lands adjacent to it in the East upto the Chinese border?
And what the Christian Japanese are up to? Have they attempted any Korean adventures while the Chinese were busy fighting amongst themselves? Have they found about the exiled Shuns in Nan? If yes, what do they think about them?
Last edited:
Totally valid points. I can't recall, but I'm sure that some of the fighting between India and the Ottomans was at the same time as the war against the Romans. (I may be wrong there).
But the alluded to idea was the Ottomans and Romans, together, taking India (as proposed by Osman). Possibly backed by Ethiopia. I'm not sure India could halt an invasion by the Ottomans AND Romans. It has the issue that Roman logistics are practically at the point where they can invade S.India by sea (or if not, it'll be done in preparation), leading to the Romans invading S.India by sea, and the Ottomans invading by land.
Vijayanagara would have to split its forces to face both, or risk either of the two overrunning vast swathes of their Empire.
Is it easy? No. Epic, yes. As I said, Anything could happen.
You are right that Romans have the logistical capability to invade Vijayanagara in the South, but do they have the necessary manpower to throw in the amounts that it would take to defeat Vijayanagara? And the South of India is basically their heartland and full of people perfectly willing to take up arms for their Samraat, not to mention the formidable rear guard that the Samraat will leave behind (may be a fourth of his standing army or more than that). Do you think that the Romans could put together a sufficient enough force to fight that and that too so far away from their core territories? And it's not as if they will be fighting a technologically inferior foe, but one which is their equal and can field larger number than them, with ease.
Well it's not that I am underestimating the Romans (they can never be) ability to fight against Vijayanagara, just the extreme amount of troubles they will have to deal with were they to invade. And if anyone feels I am exaggerating, you are free to smack those exaggerations.
I don't think you exaggerate, but it was already alluded to on page 60 that there are some worries for Vijayanagar in terms of unrest - or at least rebellion - hence the Ottoman peace treaty - and Vijayanagar is already showing logistical issues there. (Which may not be a problem later on, but still).
Honestly, the wildcard is Ethiopia. If the side with the Romans (more likely), then there is essentially an ally in India for them, and the Ottomans could bring the Muslim community on side if they return.
If Ethiopia stay neutral (most likely), then assuming no armies are allowed to cross, that forces the land invasion into the Punjab, which the Ottomans know very well by this point - but leaves someone who could make quite a bit of cash from providing supplies.
If they side with India - then the war is Indias - it traps the Romans and the Ottomans would need to have a magnificent Iskandar-style leader. I consider this almost a joke, considering the long-term relationship between the Romans and Ethiopians.
(Side Note : This would be a lovely way to reintroduce the Church of the East to Roman politics. Which could be more tumultuous than a successful invasion of India).
Have the Sikhs shown up in India yet, or are they still in the future? Or are they butterflied away? (If they are, then boo. Nobody in India gave John Company a bigger scare than the Khalsa.)
Barring Vijayanagara collapse what's in for the empire to side with the Ottomans against them given the past oh 6 centuries of unplesantry with the Turk? Yes an Ottoman prince would see advantages in conquering most of India with Byzantine help. But what is in for the empire? Losing its costly Indian conquests to the Ottomans in the next Ottoman war that is certain to come and immensely strengthening the Ottomans from the conquest of India? The empire has every reason to support Indian resistance to the Ottomans not the other way round.
Six centuries of conflict, that despite the strenuous times of the empire, has never once truly defeated them? Contemporary Romans view the Turks as a threat, but the greatest of them has now fallen, and even he never defeated them in war. The newest treaty was inked in the Turk's favor, but contemporaries view this as the product of either incompetent intelligence officials, or stealthy, traitorous diplomats. They would have ended the colossus that was Iskander's army had it not been for travel times to get word of Raya to the Office of Barbarians.
Furthermore, I must insist that the supposed edge in a renewed combat between the duo, fought in India, would be the exact opposite of how you describe it. The Ottomans may have a direct land connection to the East, but it'll be practically nonexistent once war begins. Conquest with a combined Turko-Roman force will certainly mean the preservation of Ethiopian possessions. The moment the match is struck, the Ethiopian fleet will already be ramming its way up the Indus, cutting off Ottoman India from Persia and Iraq.
Or, the Ethiopians could wait just a short while... Force the sultan to choose between the riches of India and the secure protection of its western core territories. If the more intelligent option, in my view, is chosen; the Ottomans will march to defend against the Levant. That doesn't make it a safe bet against the advancing Romans, but it's much better than just allowing them leave to pillage. Split from the west, the colonial authorities of the east will have to face off alone against Roman colonial authorities in both India and Island Asia, likely alongside both troops transported from Ethiopia (given likely Ethiopian and Roman shiplord control of the sea), and native princely states (given traditional enmity between the Hindus and Muslims in the region).
Alternatively, they could have the majority of their army sealed up east of the Indus. That decision could really be the death knell for the Ottomans. They might be able to advance a length in India, but what use are colonies without the empire? The loss of prestige and authority if they lose Iraq could be devastating. They could refuse to give in as the Roman banners loftily flow from the heights of Topkapi palace, but that'd mean the loss of their Turkey, of the conquests made by Osman I against the Ilkhanate, the land which they put all into defending from Shah Rukh and the demon Timur himself.
After that, forget the loyalty of any Janissaries on Indian soil, or Turkish irregulars. Mass desertions... Better hope all of the Sultan's many brothers lack any mixture of greed and competence, or what remains of the Ottomans will be tearing themselves apart. They'd lose both Iraq and India for their troubles then.
Either way, it's more likely we end up with India as a Roman-Ethiopian cake than a purely Ottoman one. So I think Constantinople will more than gladly take a slice.
I actually agree that it is Ottoman colonial authorities against Imperial and European colonial authorities. But this forgets that Iscandar was already using Indian troops like Rajput cavalry in his western front in the last war and the presence in India of a significant Muslim population already, the Delhi sultanate was more than 3 ceturies old at this point. So forget Janissaries and irregulars. The Ottomans will be in position to recruit large regular armies from the Muslim population of North India and pay for them with Indian revenue (and yes long term this would be moving the center of weight of the Ottomans yet further east). The Greeks and Ethiopians not so much, they can and will invent sepoys sooner or later I suppose but that is not going to match the Ottoman ability to recruit Muslim Indian troops. Hence you end up with Ottoman north India stretching all the way to Bengal and south to the OTL Balmani sultanate facing down Byzantine/Ethiopian Vijayanta and Orissa, plus the Roman Easter fleet and Ethiopian navy (assuming the Triunes don't show up to cause trouble, that the Romans fleet not entangled further east, and what strategic impact it may have) No Indian armies threatening to cross the Indus going west is a better option.
I was never suggesting the Ottoman controlled Indian armies go west across the Indus to be clear. It was whether the Ottoman armed forces would remain in the west or reinforce the east. I'm not as confident as you are in their ability to succeed against Roman and Ethiopian colonial forces so assuredly. That's a subcontinent cut in two facing off against each other, and while population may be less evenly cut, the Vijiyanagara center of industry and infrastructure was all focused around an area of the south. I'd also say the Roman ability to recruit an effective army from the native Hindu populations of their own territory is much greater than one would initially think, given the Kephales of the Eastern territories as precedent. If memory serves a Kephale in Taprobane was attached to the culture (and by seemingly implied extension the religion) of the area rather than Constantinople. A practice which caused little, to no trouble, because the Romans didn't care as long as in public they were Orthodox. Give lip service to the Patriarchs and you're free to go. I'd say people in those situations being heavily involved with the colonial bureaucracy would be more perceptive to the plights of locals, and sympathetic to any concerns they may have. Such will greatly improve the ability to recruit Sepoy-like troops into the defense against a group they have more negative history with, and reasons to distrust, than the Romans.
Also, yes, the Rajput were very nicely used by Iskander, an intelligent, pragmatic, tactically skilled Sultan whom they have reason to respect and follow. We've yet to see if his successors will be so willing to follow his lead, or the Indians so willing to fight for these future Sultans outside of an invasion started by the Romans. And still, no matter the successes in India, if the Ottomans can't fend off the tagmata from Iraq, it starts to mean less and less to the future of the empire as Roman boots reach the foothills of the Zagros mountains.
I'd like to add to the analysis @AJustMonster in that we're forgetting a player who would be very eager to reclaim territories from the Ottomans - Georgia.
With the Romans and Ethiopians on sea vs (at best) the Triunes, logistics are on the Romans side (and the ability to cut any Ottoman trade.).
Roman and Ethiopian India vs Ottoman India - Romans+Georgia vs Iraq/Iran. I'd say the odds are not on the Ottomans side there.
With the Romans and Ethiopians on sea vs (at best) the Triunes, logistics are on the Romans side (and the ability to cut any Ottoman trade.).
Roman and Ethiopian India vs Ottoman India - Romans+Georgia vs Iraq/Iran. I'd say the odds are not on the Ottomans side there.
While there hasn't been much news about Georgia as of late, I'm willing to bet they have been doubling down on their forces a la training, equipment, tactics, since the loss of the lands south of Aras. There is also the internal conflict that could be fanned, Satraps that were afraid of Iskander would look on questioningly at his sons for a short while until they make up their mind about "The Sons of Durdurulamaz Güç".
But remember that not all the Rajputs side with Iskander and the Ottomans, if 1 sided with the Ottomans, 5 would side with the Vijayanagarans (as the religious rivalry still runs too deep especially between Rajputs and the Muslim Ottomans) . And this was mentioned by B444 himself in his replies.
And do not think that the Rajputs which sided with the Turks would do so now that the Turks have fallen into civil war, in fact they would be the most interested party in breaking away from the Ottoman vassalage. Remember that the fraction of the Rajputs which was cowed down by the force of arms of the Iskander led Ottomans, and not due to their willingness to follow them. And now that the Vijayanagarans have thrown back the Ottomans over the Indus, they have no reason to remain loyal to a foreign conqueror.
Sir Omega: Pretty much. The Vlachs have a history of being steady (albeit not powerful) allies. The Serbs from the Roman perspective act mainly like annoying trolls.
Stark: In hindsight, not following Nikolaios’ plan was a massive mistake on Helena’s part (I intended it to be that way). It was the last chance to stop the Ottomans from moving from ‘respectable threat’ to ‘SUPER-MAJOR threat’. Although on the other hand, the mentality that if you just raise enough tagmata you can declare yourself and become the legitimate Emperor is one that really needs to die. Ideally you could kill that and also prevent a mega-Ottoman. If you have to choose one, I’d personally go with the former even if it means a mega-Ottoman, but it’s a really tough choice and I can see why others might disagree. This will certainly be a hotly-debated question amongst Roman historians ITTL.
In regards to your question on money, here’s a copy of an answer I came up with earlier:
The Empire mints two silver coins, the miliaresion and stavraton valued in the Laskarid currency reforms at one-tenth and one-twentieth of a hyperpyron respectively. That was 300 years ago though and considering the influx of Mexican and Japanese silver (not to the extent of OTL but still there) I can see the silver coins losing some value relative to the hyperpyron, especially since maintaining a precise 10/20:1 value ratio probably wasn’t a high priority of the Roman government. So I’ll say that the value has dropped to a 12/24:1 value ratio. Going with that figure the miliaresion must have a silver content equal in value to .317 grams of gold (hyperpyron containing 3.8 grams of gold). According to Fernand Braudel in The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip II in 1610 the average gold-silver value in Europe was 1:12. Therefore a miliaresion has .317x12 = 3.8 grams of silver.
Now assuming an annual budget of 16 million hyperpyra, that comes to 192 million miliaresions or 729.6 million grams of silver. That converts to just under 730 metric tons of silver. Based on the tables that puts the Empire somewhat behind late 17th/early 18th century France but well ahead of everyone else.
So the Roman Empire right now is comparable to France late in Louis XIV’s reign. The next major financial power would be the Triple Monarchy. I’d put their annual revenue around 450-500 metric tons of silver a year, slightly above that of Spain in 1600. The two of them are the financial superpowers of Europe; the only reason the Holy Roman Emperors avoided a major credit crunch is that they were able to squeeze the Triunes for bullion after beating them in the Rhine War.
Rui: There is a rough ministerial system already. Andronikos Sarantenos is the Roman equivalent of a British Foreign Secretary, and the Roman versions of Finance Minister and Justice Manager/Attorney General will be showing up in the next update.
As for provincial government, there’s some local autonomy. The larger cities have self-governing communes (Thessaloniki, Smyrna, Antioch) which have some taxation and legal authority over city citizens within the walls, although they do have senior Kephales looking over their shoulders. Peasant agricultural villages also have some leeway in administering internal affairs through councils of local elders provided they don’t violate Imperial law and they pay their taxes on time.
But the White Palace has absolutely no interest in devolving significate powers to the provinces. After all, if they think they can run themselves they might just get delusions of grandeur and try to break away from the Empire. Rhomania had a serious problem with that in the late 1100s and early 1200s. And democracy is very much a dirty word in government circles.
Duke of Nova Scotia: There’d be a coup justified by ‘the Emperor is bananas’ before he could get very far. A Senate which is more than just an irrelevant fancy social club…being able to vote…on legislation! Sounds like Venice…excuse me while I get my eyeball knife.
The Georgians are definitely working on rebuilding and upgrading their armies (in much the same way they reacted after getting hammered in the Orthodox War, rebuilding and then coming out swinging with a much improved army-that’s how they got most of the trans-Aras in the first place).
HanEmpire: I’d never heard of that show but now I really like it. There are a lot of Roman bureaucrats that would completely agree with this.
RogueTraderEnthusiast: The Idwaits’ main defense, besides logistical/geographic issues of course, is that their territory is mainly modern Sudan. It doesn’t yield nearly enough to justify the expense of taking it over. But if they started cozying up to the Marinids or Ottomans, they’d get put on Constantinople’s ‘must kill’ list really quick. If the Idwaits are paying attention, they know this. But if Rhomania or Ethiopia decide they want to have a go at the Idwaits, they have a ready-made casus belli. Per the treaties ending the war, the Idwait Malik-ate owes both the Empire and Ethiopia an annual tribute. Let’s just say the Malik is behind on his payments.
Emperor of Greater India: I agree. Rhomania could give the Vijayanagari all sorts of problems within cannon-range of the shore, seizing and/or sacking coastal settlements (although the Vijayanagari are building a fleet of their own so the Romans wouldn’t go unchallenged). But once they move inland beyond the range of offshore guns they have no chance. Even if somehow the Romans were able to ship every single tagma to India (which is not even remotely close to possible) and attempt a conquest of Vijayanagar, no bookie would give the Romans any better than 3 to 1 odds against.
I admit that Swati Kashmir has fallen off my radar so I’m undecided about what’s going on there.
Bengal is currently dominated by the Spanish Viceroyalty of Sutanuti, but it’s a very decentralized system with a bunch of petty Indian lords paying tribute to the Viceroy. To the west Oudh is the major power on the central Ganges and was never conquered by Iskandar although Ottoman troops did raid it. Any Vijayanagari envoy demanding tribute will have a short life expectancy. To the east Ayutthaya is a prosperous kingdom and sees a lot of business with the Triunes (it’s comparable to modern Myanmar is scope). The area in between Ayutthaya and the Viceroyalty is dominated by the Ahom although they don’t control the whole region.
The Christian Japanese have been occupied mainly with smacking down any Japanese who have a problem with Japan being Christian. It’s a full time job. But once that’s completed I view some kind of Imjin War as almost inevitable, since the Japanese Emperor will need to do something with all these soldiers running around. As for how alt-Imjin will go I can’t say, but unlike IOTL the Japanese will not have an artillery deficit vis-à-vis the Koreans. They are aware of the Wu, but from their point of view they’re too far to care about.
Arrix85: At this point the only power that could go toe-to-toe with the Vijayanagari on land is China. Only internal problems can bring them down at this point, although I will point that the Mughals were territorially at their height in 1707 and then everything proceeded to go very badly for them.
MarshalofMontival: I’m still fuzzy on timing, but I am planning on a TTL Sikh version at some point in the 1600s (and will include an alt-Ranjit Singh). On a side note, I wonder how the Anglo-Sikh Wars would’ve gone if they’d started whilst the Lion of the Punjab was still alive.
Lascaris:
Ottomans-So we are agreed, we attack India.
Rhomania-We are agreed.
Ottomans-Most excellent. [Deploys 100,000 to the Punjab. Vijayanagar counters with 250,000.] Uh, Rhomania, can you help me out here?
Rhomania-Sure thing. [Puts 9,000 men into Surat.]
Ottomans-Nine thousand, that’s it?!
Rhomania-Uh, yeah. Did you think I could put in more? Steamships won’t be a thing for at least another 150 years, dude.
Ottomans: I hate you. [Vijayanagar stabs them in the face.]
Rhomania. Mmmm, popcorn. [Munching sounds.]
AJustMonster: I concur with all of this. I’ll also add that there is no way a large Ottoman army could be sustained in India with supply lines going all the way back to Persia. So they’d have to base out of the Punjab. Any march deeper into India will have the rivers of the Punjab bisecting their supply lines. There’s all sorts of mischief the Ethiopians at Thatta could get up to.
I hope that covered everybody’s questions. Let me know if I missed any. And I must say that I’m really enjoying the detailed analysis and discussion. I’m honored.
Stark: In hindsight, not following Nikolaios’ plan was a massive mistake on Helena’s part (I intended it to be that way). It was the last chance to stop the Ottomans from moving from ‘respectable threat’ to ‘SUPER-MAJOR threat’. Although on the other hand, the mentality that if you just raise enough tagmata you can declare yourself and become the legitimate Emperor is one that really needs to die. Ideally you could kill that and also prevent a mega-Ottoman. If you have to choose one, I’d personally go with the former even if it means a mega-Ottoman, but it’s a really tough choice and I can see why others might disagree. This will certainly be a hotly-debated question amongst Roman historians ITTL.
In regards to your question on money, here’s a copy of an answer I came up with earlier:
The Empire mints two silver coins, the miliaresion and stavraton valued in the Laskarid currency reforms at one-tenth and one-twentieth of a hyperpyron respectively. That was 300 years ago though and considering the influx of Mexican and Japanese silver (not to the extent of OTL but still there) I can see the silver coins losing some value relative to the hyperpyron, especially since maintaining a precise 10/20:1 value ratio probably wasn’t a high priority of the Roman government. So I’ll say that the value has dropped to a 12/24:1 value ratio. Going with that figure the miliaresion must have a silver content equal in value to .317 grams of gold (hyperpyron containing 3.8 grams of gold). According to Fernand Braudel in The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip II in 1610 the average gold-silver value in Europe was 1:12. Therefore a miliaresion has .317x12 = 3.8 grams of silver.
Now assuming an annual budget of 16 million hyperpyra, that comes to 192 million miliaresions or 729.6 million grams of silver. That converts to just under 730 metric tons of silver. Based on the tables that puts the Empire somewhat behind late 17th/early 18th century France but well ahead of everyone else.
So the Roman Empire right now is comparable to France late in Louis XIV’s reign. The next major financial power would be the Triple Monarchy. I’d put their annual revenue around 450-500 metric tons of silver a year, slightly above that of Spain in 1600. The two of them are the financial superpowers of Europe; the only reason the Holy Roman Emperors avoided a major credit crunch is that they were able to squeeze the Triunes for bullion after beating them in the Rhine War.
Rui: There is a rough ministerial system already. Andronikos Sarantenos is the Roman equivalent of a British Foreign Secretary, and the Roman versions of Finance Minister and Justice Manager/Attorney General will be showing up in the next update.
As for provincial government, there’s some local autonomy. The larger cities have self-governing communes (Thessaloniki, Smyrna, Antioch) which have some taxation and legal authority over city citizens within the walls, although they do have senior Kephales looking over their shoulders. Peasant agricultural villages also have some leeway in administering internal affairs through councils of local elders provided they don’t violate Imperial law and they pay their taxes on time.
But the White Palace has absolutely no interest in devolving significate powers to the provinces. After all, if they think they can run themselves they might just get delusions of grandeur and try to break away from the Empire. Rhomania had a serious problem with that in the late 1100s and early 1200s. And democracy is very much a dirty word in government circles.
Duke of Nova Scotia: There’d be a coup justified by ‘the Emperor is bananas’ before he could get very far. A Senate which is more than just an irrelevant fancy social club…being able to vote…on legislation! Sounds like Venice…excuse me while I get my eyeball knife.
The Georgians are definitely working on rebuilding and upgrading their armies (in much the same way they reacted after getting hammered in the Orthodox War, rebuilding and then coming out swinging with a much improved army-that’s how they got most of the trans-Aras in the first place).
HanEmpire: I’d never heard of that show but now I really like it. There are a lot of Roman bureaucrats that would completely agree with this.
RogueTraderEnthusiast: The Idwaits’ main defense, besides logistical/geographic issues of course, is that their territory is mainly modern Sudan. It doesn’t yield nearly enough to justify the expense of taking it over. But if they started cozying up to the Marinids or Ottomans, they’d get put on Constantinople’s ‘must kill’ list really quick. If the Idwaits are paying attention, they know this. But if Rhomania or Ethiopia decide they want to have a go at the Idwaits, they have a ready-made casus belli. Per the treaties ending the war, the Idwait Malik-ate owes both the Empire and Ethiopia an annual tribute. Let’s just say the Malik is behind on his payments.
Emperor of Greater India: I agree. Rhomania could give the Vijayanagari all sorts of problems within cannon-range of the shore, seizing and/or sacking coastal settlements (although the Vijayanagari are building a fleet of their own so the Romans wouldn’t go unchallenged). But once they move inland beyond the range of offshore guns they have no chance. Even if somehow the Romans were able to ship every single tagma to India (which is not even remotely close to possible) and attempt a conquest of Vijayanagar, no bookie would give the Romans any better than 3 to 1 odds against.
I admit that Swati Kashmir has fallen off my radar so I’m undecided about what’s going on there.
Bengal is currently dominated by the Spanish Viceroyalty of Sutanuti, but it’s a very decentralized system with a bunch of petty Indian lords paying tribute to the Viceroy. To the west Oudh is the major power on the central Ganges and was never conquered by Iskandar although Ottoman troops did raid it. Any Vijayanagari envoy demanding tribute will have a short life expectancy. To the east Ayutthaya is a prosperous kingdom and sees a lot of business with the Triunes (it’s comparable to modern Myanmar is scope). The area in between Ayutthaya and the Viceroyalty is dominated by the Ahom although they don’t control the whole region.
The Christian Japanese have been occupied mainly with smacking down any Japanese who have a problem with Japan being Christian. It’s a full time job. But once that’s completed I view some kind of Imjin War as almost inevitable, since the Japanese Emperor will need to do something with all these soldiers running around. As for how alt-Imjin will go I can’t say, but unlike IOTL the Japanese will not have an artillery deficit vis-à-vis the Koreans. They are aware of the Wu, but from their point of view they’re too far to care about.
Arrix85: At this point the only power that could go toe-to-toe with the Vijayanagari on land is China. Only internal problems can bring them down at this point, although I will point that the Mughals were territorially at their height in 1707 and then everything proceeded to go very badly for them.
MarshalofMontival: I’m still fuzzy on timing, but I am planning on a TTL Sikh version at some point in the 1600s (and will include an alt-Ranjit Singh). On a side note, I wonder how the Anglo-Sikh Wars would’ve gone if they’d started whilst the Lion of the Punjab was still alive.
Lascaris:
Ottomans-So we are agreed, we attack India.
Rhomania-We are agreed.
Ottomans-Most excellent. [Deploys 100,000 to the Punjab. Vijayanagar counters with 250,000.] Uh, Rhomania, can you help me out here?
Rhomania-Sure thing. [Puts 9,000 men into Surat.]
Ottomans-Nine thousand, that’s it?!
Rhomania-Uh, yeah. Did you think I could put in more? Steamships won’t be a thing for at least another 150 years, dude.
Ottomans: I hate you. [Vijayanagar stabs them in the face.]
Rhomania. Mmmm, popcorn. [Munching sounds.]
AJustMonster: I concur with all of this. I’ll also add that there is no way a large Ottoman army could be sustained in India with supply lines going all the way back to Persia. So they’d have to base out of the Punjab. Any march deeper into India will have the rivers of the Punjab bisecting their supply lines. There’s all sorts of mischief the Ethiopians at Thatta could get up to.
I hope that covered everybody’s questions. Let me know if I missed any. And I must say that I’m really enjoying the detailed analysis and discussion. I’m honored.
It's a great show, I heartily recommend it.
And interesting that even this quasy unified HRE has financial problems. I guess there's no taxation like direct taxation
(HR Emperors can only directly tax their own territories in HRE, right?)