Effects of earlier/larger Ottoman expansion into Europe-

[raharris1973]

Part I. Effects

I'll talk about some possible interesting effects and worry about PoDs later.-

Say the Ottomans are able to expand into Italy, much of Germany and Poland.
Is there a possibility of other Bosnias or Albanias developing, where a big share of the population converts to Islam?

My favorite candidates for conversion would be-
1. The Bohemian Hussites. Maybe like the Bogomil heretics who became Muslim in Bosnia and Bulgaria, they might become Ottoman loyalists and muslims, partly in reaction against their German Catholic neighbors. no Pilsner here, modern lighter beers are based on english ales.

2. Lithuanians - They were pagans until very late and linguistically had little in common with their neighbors. They could be a tributary ally of the Ottomans or loyalists within the empire.

3. Romanies? undoubtedly if they took anything from Islam they would make it their own.

4. Vlachs (later Romanians) ? Only because they seem to have been ridden over by nomads for so long before they established identifiable states.

An occupied Italy and the Renaissance - would ottoman occupation destroy it, or might it have the effect of the French invasions, injuring it in its home cities but importing many of its aspects back to Turkey?

Balance of power effects-

By poaching on what later became core Habsburg domains, maybe it permits France to become hegemon in western Europe.

Part II. PoDs- pick your favorite

1. The Black Death is worse (Robert Silverberg used this one, but I don't like it because a worse Black Death in Europe is probably a worse black death everywhere else).

2. No Timurlane- He smashed up Ottoman Anatolia pretty good in 1402. If you avoid him, you give the ottomans at least a thirty year head start. I'm not sure how much they can do with it though. As an added bonus for later however, the lack of a Timurlane slows down the collapse of the Golden Horde and the rise of Muscovy to a position where it can menace the Ottmans.

3.No Persian consolidation under Shiite Safavids. Persia is run by petty Sunni, mostly Turkic ruled states. It does not become an ideological concern for Suleiman, who does not feel impelled to attack Persia or occupy the Mameluke lands of Egypt and the Levant. This frees the Ottomans to stay focused on Europe, where they take Vienna and keep moving. Since its too late to prevent the Reformation at this point, the crushing of the Habsburgs ends up crippling the Habsburgs and the Counter-Reformation and means more of non-Ottoman Europe is Protestant.

4. Internal Ottoman changes-
IIRC the Turkic ghazis favored lots of wars of expansion directed at Chriistian Europe. The janissaries and groups with origins in Europe preferred expansion into exsiting Muslim territorries like Egypt and Iraq. There was tension and a shifting balance between the two that influenced Ottoman history. What if the Ghazis were more dominant- the area south of the Taurus is ignored.

5. More disasters after Manzikert- The Turks gain Anatolia and Thrace in the decades after that battle. Constantinople is besiged and taken in the 1100s or early 1200s. Is this plausible?

6. No call for Crusades. Somewhat similar to #5, the Byzantines are crushed between Norman-Venetian attacks on Greece and turkic attacks on Anatolia and Thrace

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

I feel that Poland and Germany are too far from Istanbul to fall under Ottoman control. Italy, however, is quite another matter. I do not think it would be possible to convert large numbers of Italians to Islam - however, much of it, particularly the South and Sicily, might be vulnerable to returning to Orthodoxy.

The Balkans were less deeply Christianized than Italy, so it was more possible to win converts. But after Mehmed II elevated the Patriarch of Constantinople, the rate of conversion slowed nearly to a halt. In Italy or anywhere else, there would still be a Pope, even if he did have to relocate.

Ottoman concentration on Italy, however, would likely make the Ottoman Empire much less a traditional Islamic state, as it became after the conquest of the Mamelukes, which could have drastic and interesting consequences.

 

[Faeelin]

I feel that Poland and Germany are too far from Istanbul to fall under Ottoman control. Italy, however, is quite another matter. I do not think it would be possible to convert large numbers of Italians to Islam - however, much of it, particularly the South and Sicily, might be vulnerable to returning to ORthodoxy

Why would the Ottomans support this?

Ottoman concentration on Italy, however, would likely make the Ottoman Empire much less a traditional Islamic state, as it became after the conquest of the Mamelukes, which could have drastic and interesting consequences.

Indeed. The mind boggles at Leonardo Da Vinci in the court of the sultan.

I wonder if they'd pick up printing, in TTL.

The other question is how this effects Italy. Does coffee drinking pick up earlier? What happens to Venice, with the Adriatic's mouth controlled by the Ottomans? Do the Ottomans keep the peace in Italy better than OTL?

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Initially there was no Catholic millet - all Christians were absolutely subject to the Patriarch of Constantinople. I suspect the Patriarch would reestablish his control over Italy and Greekify it.

There were actually some Italians in Ottoman service, but yes, Vinci Pasha has an odd ring to it. That would make some good AH fiction. Coffee drinking would likely pick up earlier, and the Ottomans would absolutely keep better peace in Italy - both through orderly rule and the need for everyone else to unite to avoid being conquered.

Why would the Ottomans support this?



Indeed. The mind boggles at Leonardo Da Vinci in the court of the sultan.

I wonder if they'd pick up printing, in TTL.

The other question is how this effects Italy. Does coffee drinking pick up earlier? What happens to Venice, with the Adriatic's mouth controlled by the Ottomans? Do the Ottomans keep the peace in Italy better than OTL?

 

[Faeelin]

Initially there was no Catholic millet - all Christians were absolutely subject to the Patriarch of Constantinople. I suspect the Patriarch would reestablish his control over Italy and Greekify it.

Wasn't there a seperate Armenian millet?

There were actually some Italians in Ottoman service, but yes, Vinci Pasha has an odd ring to it. That would make some good AH fiction.

Of course, there's the whole effect of Italian commerce on the Empire. You thought the Greeks were commercial? Imagine the Medicis setting up shop in the Empire.

But I suspect the Ottomans would merely redo The Byzantine conquests.

Coffee drinking would likely pick up earlier, and the Ottomans would absolutely keep better peace in Italy - both through orderly rule and the need for everyone else to unite to avoid being conquered.

I don't know if the Ottoman Empire was such a boon for Christians as you make it out to be, however.

 

[MerryPrankster]

"But I suspect the Ottomans would merely redo The Byzantine conquests."

That would mean Sicily and southern Italy, though at their high point, the Byzantines were able to control Rome again. Mehmed II supposedly wanted "the trophies of New and Old Rome" and he might go for Rome itself for ego purposes.

How much of Italy will the Ottomans be physically able to conquer? They might WANT a certain amount, but will they be able to take it?

I dunno about the Hussites converting to Islam en masse...they seemed bent on having a purified Christianity (proto-Protestants). Them adopting another established religion seems difficult. Perhaps we need to see why the Bogomils converted to Islam to see if we can make the Hussites or another group act in the same way.

On the matter of the Ottomans and the Renaissance, what would they do about representational art? The Koran prohibits it, I think, but the Ottomans weren't really known for being zealots (though they did have Selim the Grim killing lots of Shi'ites, and one Sultan had to be told very firmly by the mullahs that killing off all the Christians was NOT an option). Might they insist on all the cathedrals having mosque-esque geometric patterns?

 

[raharris1973]

Regarding Germany and Poland

Oh, I wasn't thinking in terms of the Turks washing their boots on the North Sea or Rhine. I was thinking more along the lines of them expanding for an additional 200-250 miles or so across the whole expanse of their OTL northernmost frontier, getting them border territories like Galicia, nuggets of western Ukraine, Silesia, Bohemia, Austria and some scraps of Bavaria and Saxony. I suppose they could by extension reach the Baltic if the Lithuanians became a Muslim ally much like the Crimean Khanate was in OTL.

What's your favorite POD for greater Ottoman expansion anyway. I offered up about 6 possibilities I think.

 

[raharris1973]

Faellin

What did you mean by "merely redo the Byzantine conquests"?

Hmm, more Italians in Ottoman commerce. If Italians make themselves bankers in the empire, will they have a rivalry with Jews? IIRC monarchs began tolerating more anti-semitism in Christian Europe when Italian bankers became available.

 

[MerryPrankster]

I like the PODs that leave the Mamelukes as an independent power. The ghazis being more powerful is a good POD.

Four Muslim "big powers" (Mameluke Egypt, the Ottoman Empire, Persia, and the Moguls of India) would make a more interesting world, I think.

John,

If the Empire is more Europe-centric, do you think the Ottomans will change their military system so that every military campaign doesn't HAVE to start at Constantinople? I've read "Lords of the Horizons" and some other Ottoman books and they describe how the armies were marshalled at Constantinople and then went wherever they needed to go.

Or, to be even more extreme, WI the Sultan decides to move his capital around a bit, like the later Roman emperors did, to be "closer to the action"? Constantinople, with its established bureaucracy and prestige, would probably still be important.

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

John,

If the Empire is more Europe-centric, do you think the Ottomans will change their military system so that every military campaign doesn't HAVE to start at Constantinople? I've read "Lords of the Horizons" and some other Ottoman books and they describe how the armies were marshalled at Constantinople and then went wherever they needed to go.

Or, to be even more extreme, WI the Sultan decides to move his capital around a bit, like the later Roman emperors did, to be "closer to the action"? Constantinople, with its established bureaucracy and prestige, would probably still be important.

The Ottoman Empire was too centralized for that to work. The Ottoman system had the bureacracy and Sultan as counterbalancing forces; the absence of either would be a problem. The Later Roman Emperors didn't so much move around the capitals as divide the empire into different states, and in any case the Roman Empire was less centralized than the Ottoman.

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

Wasn't there a seperate Armenian millet?

I don't know if the Ottoman Empire was such a boon for Christians as you make it out to be, however.

Yes, there was an Armenian millet, but that was slightly later and Armenians were pretty much limited to the east at that point. What does that have to do with Italy? It would be impossible to have a Catholic millet leader in Italy, as he would necessarily be subject to the Pope. Orthodoxy was recent enough in S. Italy and Sicily for it to recover lost ground, IMHO.

I don't know what you mean by the second sentence. I don't think it's arguable that the Ottomans would have imposed greater order and security on Italy than the competing city-states could have.

And Ottoman rule was certainly better for Christians than were Western states for minority sects. In any case, the only specific benefit I mentioned was that there would have been a much earlier introduction to coffee, which to me is a prefectly acceptable price to pay for subjugation.

 

[MerryPrankster]

John,

I was under the impression that at various points, some Roman Emperors relocated their base of operations to Milan or Ravenna whenever there was a need (a campaign along the frontier, which that late was fairly close to Italy itself).

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

John,

I was under the impression that at various points, some Roman Emperors relocated their base of operations to Milan or Ravenna whenever there was a need (a campaign along the frontier, which that late was fairly close to Italy itself).

After the sack of Rome the capital was moved to Ravenna because it was in an extremely defensible position, whereas Rome was indefensible. Milan was the capital for a while for political reasons, mostly due to the lingering strength of paganism in Rome.

 

[Paul Spring]

Putting the Orthodox Patriarch in charge of Catholics in Italy is going to really piss off a lot of Catholics. It's been centuries since Sicily and southern Italy were dominated by the Orthodox church - I'm pretty sure that by the late 15th-early 16th century a large majority were Roman Catholic and had been so for a while.

 

[MerryPrankster]

Paul,

That could be the seed of trouble later on...a Crusade by a Pope in exile in Spain against the "Muhammadan infidels" and their "schismatic" puppets who are luring the Catholic faithful away?

 

[MerryPrankster]

I also have a question for John...

How exactly did the conquests of the Mameluke territories make the Ottoman Empire more of a "traditional Islamic state"?

 

[Faeelin]

Yes, there was an Armenian millet, but that was slightly later and Armenians were pretty much limited to the east at that point. What does that have to do with Italy?

An example of a seperate millet for various christian states?

It would be impossible to have a Catholic millet leader in Italy, as he would necessarily be subject to the Pope. Orthodoxy was recent enough in S. Italy and Sicily for it to recover lost ground, IMHO.

300 years? Maybe. But I wouldn't care to bet on it, and the Ottomans don't seem the type to go around manipulating Christian faiths like that.

I don't think it's arguable that the Ottomans would have imposed greater order and security on Italy than the competing city-states could have.

No, I agree that they could do so initially.

And Ottoman rule was certainly better for Christians than were Western states for minority sects. In any case, the only specific benefit I mentioned was that there would have been a much earlier introduction to coffee, which to me is a prefectly acceptable price to pay for subjugation.

But if they were not a free and independent people, would the Italians have developed espresso and cappucino?

 

[Gladi]

We are talking late 15th century, right?
Hussites would not convert. They were nationalistic Protestants, never defeated (Hussite wars ended because of internal struggle and were settled with favorable peace terms for hussites), hell just recently there was a Hussite king even, and there were still a lot of fanatics remaining.

 

[MerryPrankster]

Gladi,

Perhaps there's a "Hussite jihad" against the Ottomans? Sipahi horseman versus the quasi-tank Hussite "war wagons"?

 

[Paul Spring]

In OTL, Protestant groups lived in Hungary and the Principality of Transylvania under Ottoman sovereignty. The Ottomans had a reputation of being fairly tolerant of different Christian groups, and not favoring one over the others, so in many respects the Ottoman Empire was more attractive to Protestants than the neighboring Hapsburg lands, at least from the early 17th century on when the Austrian Hapsburgs abandoned several decades of de facto tolerance of Protestantism in their territories.

It's possible that the Hussites wouldn't fight the Ottomans if they were guaranteed religious tolerance and the right to manage their own affairs. This was common Ottoman practice anyway, so the Ottomans might seem like a better deal even if anti-Islamic fears and prejudices are factored in. Hussite forces might even fight as Ottoman allies - the Principality of Transylvania fought against the Hapsburg Emperors as an Ottoman vassal state, and much of the aristocratic elite of the Principality were actually Calvinist Protestants.