10 vs 1 at varna hah, sounds like fairy tailes in present day education of turkey tbh
pretty sure it was the hungarian and allys who where outnumbered 2vs 1 or more at the batle not the other way arround


also pretty sure if you go by present day then
if some country nukes mecca alot of christians living in arabic/islam countrys will die from angry mobs, lots of protests demanding war and then a jihad called and wars declared
somehow i suspect nuking rome would probably result in a simular situation but perhaps slightly less extreme in terms of killing/raping civilians, with the difference that christian nations generally got the bigger guns, nukes and bombs if war does break out and a guy like trump who seems to be going by the moment might have the briliant idea to respond in kind (mecca)
either side would be trouble if you ask me eitherway.


and to comment from point 1 of the op
plenty of potential christian allys if the ottoman take rome

france-austrian wars where in 1494+ if the ottomans took rome arround 1490 with mehmed you can be pretty sure both would come down to kick the turks out instead and fight over italy later
the peasent wars in spain only lasted for 1-2 years and was in aragon i believe not in castilie
and the english war of the roses ended arround 1485
The russians at the time had ivan the terrible on the throne who was married to a niece of the byzantine Emperor and claimed the third rome, i wouldnt be suprised if he joins either

ontop of that you already had the venician-ottoman war in 1499
the polish/ottoman wars starting in 1485 i'm sure they would love the help
and a hungarian-ottos war in 1491 wich ended in a stalemate
on a sidenote in a timeline where rome falls the hungarian might be willing to keep funding the black army after the death of corvinus wich was more then a match for any turkish

+all those minors in italy and germany
i'd say plenty of potential candidates for a grand turkey (shoot) crusade all you need is the motivation and intrest and somehow i suspect you would have both of those if rome is destroyed by the ottomans


and on point 2
the turks needed a 2vs1 majority and suprise to win the batle of varna, and lost multiple batles before that whenever they where in minority so i wouldnt say they where that superior and could definatly be defeated

nah not Turkish propoganda I was just misinformed. Looked it up you're right.

That being said its pretty well known by most historians of the era that the Ottomans did have tactical superiority and better generalship. Not to say they were unstoppable--sure they lost battles. But there was a reason Europeans thought the Ottomans could not be defeated for over 100 years until the myth finally broke after Lapento.

I've already admitted that this scenario is unfeasible, so theres no sense in continuing to argue with me. I'm trying to find a feasible scenario now, for my book.
 
Top