If The Bryzantines Survived...

If Somehow the Bryzantines Survived,even repelling,EVEN Conquering the Turk's Lands,What Butterflies will happened? is a Napoleonic war still happening or the Franc-Prussian War will never happen,perhaps?
 
Depends. What POD do you have in mind, and how much of their old territory do they get to keep? Without proper context, its impossible to say what even the immediate consequences would be, never mind looking forward to the 18th or 19th centuries.
 
If Somehow the Bryzantines Survived,even repelling,EVEN Conquering the Turk's Lands,What Butterflies will happened? is a Napoleonic war still happening or the Franc-Prussian War will never happen,perhaps?

What do you mean the Turks land? Do you mean Iran, Iraq etc? Or Anatolia and Armenia, which was previously Byzantine?
 
What do you mean the Turks land? Do you mean Iran, Iraq etc? Or Anatolia and Armenia, which was previously Byzantine?
what i mean,is they repelled the turkish invaders,and CHASE THEM BACK to the turkish invader's doorsteps,and annexing the turkish invaders(they won)
 
I don't think that is possible. I will explain my answer later in more detail.

Actually it was...,Romanos the IV Diogenes was winning the battle of Mantzikert until the rearguard under Doukas the younger committed treason...
Alp Arslan would turn south west as he was originally planning,until he won Mantzikert.
What was impossible is to turn the Turks back to nowdays Turkestan in central Asia which was too far inland in the heart of Asia.
 
If Somehow the Bryzantines Survived,even repelling,EVEN Conquering the Turk's Lands,What Butterflies will happened? is a Napoleonic war still happening or the Franc-Prussian War will never happen,perhaps?

different renaissance (no byzantine exodus)
possible delayed or different discovery of the New World (road to east not blocked by turks)
no "third rome" russia - interesting orthodox christianity
balkans flourish - no turkish conquest (even if byz manage to subjugate them, they wouldn't collect their newborn sons to train as an elite fighting force..)
hungary wins big, possibly resists the austrians
different islam, egypt, arab or mughal based calpihate, no shiites/über shiites
fun in crimea & rest of black sea
most royal families butterflied away as getting some byzantine blood in the family will probably be a prestigious thing to have (at least to the orthodox & italians)
aragon/spain/france will have a difficult time getting naples (byz can't conquer it but could help defend it from the franks and spaniards; at least you can do business with the italians)
 
different renaissance (no byzantine exodus)
possible delayed or different discovery of the New World (road to east not blocked by turks)
no "third rome" russia - interesting orthodox christianity [/qupte]

2: Road to East still, barring butterflies, blocked in every way it was OTL - the problem is in Egypt, not Thrace.

balkans flourish - no turkish conquest (even if byz manage to subjugate them, they wouldn't collect their newborn sons to train as an elite fighting force..)

There was a lot more to the Ottoman rule than the Janissaries.

hungary wins big, possibly resists the austrians

Why would Hungary win big here?

different islam, egypt, arab or mughal based calpihate, no shiites/über shiites

Why no shiites/uber states?

fun in crimea & rest of black sea
most royal families butterflied away as getting some byzantine blood in the family will probably be a prestigious thing to have (at least to the orthodox & italians)

This requires the Byzantines wanting to marry off princesses to smelly Franks, though.

aragon/spain/france will have a difficult time getting naples (byz can't conquer it but could help defend it from the franks and spaniards; at least you can do business with the italians)

Byz can most certainly conquer it, and even if it chooses not to, why is it more okay with Italian foes than French/Spanish foes? The Normans of Sicily were a pain in the behind.
 
-Road to East still, barring butterflies, blocked in every way it was OTL - the problem is in Egypt, not Thrace.

Hmm i guess you're right.

-There was a lot more to the Ottoman rule than the Janissaries.

don't get me wrong, i'm turkish myself, and know that the ottoman civilization was much more than smash stomp chomp. still, i think that the balkans got screwed big time and lost the chance to form a unified south slavic identity (if they had ever had it).

-Why would Hungary win big here?

I was thinking about the manpower and resources that fighting the turks have cost them, not to mention their eventual partition. Assuming a non wanked byz, hungary would be in a good position to control the states in the balkans that fell to the turks OTL.

-Why no shiites/uber states?

Ottomans after Selim saw it as their god-given mission to be the defenders of sunni islam. i'm assuming that the lack of sunni domination (at least the lack of a very powerful, centralized sunni state that is hostile to shiite persia) will affect the evolution of islam in the region. You could have shiite ideas finding influence in mainstream islam and avoid the schism, have the schism as OTL but much more powerful in the arabian peninsula due to lack of ottomans. anyone's guess really.

-This requires the Byzantines wanting to marry off princesses to smelly Franks, though.

considering that they married into the house of osman, i'm sure that the byzantines wouldn't have that much of a problem with using princesses to form alliances/keep rivals at bay. in any case, even a handful of marriages would change the royal families in europe forever, considering that they are just one big family (just imagine a palaiologos or doukas marrying a one of the early habsburgs)

-Byz can most certainly conquer it, and even if it chooses not to, why is it more okay with Italian foes than French/Spanish foes? The Normans of Sicily were a pain in the behind.

if they recognize the threat that the huge centralized (compared to italy) spain & france pose for their mediterranean interests, i think that they would rather support the little dukes of italy, accursed normans they may be. besides, the age of roaming around europe and settling in anywhere with a nice beach normans is long past. so trying to vassalize naples with a couple of bases (say, around apulia) would be an sensible goal; it would also help control straits of otranto and contain the venetians. trying to conquer catholic italy will be a pain in the arse. then again, you might get mad emperors down the line obsessed with becoming the new justinian.
 
don't get me wrong, i'm turkish myself, and know that the ottoman civilization was much more than smash stomp chomp. still, i think that the balkans got screwed big time and lost the chance to form a unified south slavic identity (if they had ever had it).

From what I can tell, there never was much of a chance. I'm not saying Ottoman rule helped here, but there's a split anyway.

I was thinking about the manpower and resources that fighting the turks have cost them, not to mention their eventual partition. Assuming a non wanked byz, hungary would be in a good position to control the states in the balkans that fell to the turks OTL.

It doesn't take a wanked Byzantium to succeed in the Balkans and/or interfere with Hungary taking places in the Balkans.

-Why no shiites/uber states?

Ottomans after Selim saw it as their god-given mission to be the defenders of sunni islam. i'm assuming that the lack of sunni domination (at least the lack of a very powerful, centralized sunni state that is hostile to shiite persia) will affect the evolution of islam in the region. You could have shiite ideas finding influence in mainstream islam and avoid the schism, have the schism as OTL but much more powerful in the arabian peninsula due to lack of ottomans. anyone's guess really.

The schism existed long before the House of Osman, and depending on what the Byzantines control, there might well be a powerful, centralized Sunni state - Iran or Egypt can host one.

considering that they married into the house of osman, i'm sure that the byzantines wouldn't have that much of a problem with using princesses to form alliances/keep rivals at bay. in any case, even a handful of marriages would change the royal families in europe forever, considering that they are just one big family (just imagine a palaiologos or doukas marrying a one of the early habsburgs)

That was in a situation which won't come up TTL, though.

And I'm not sure they really were one big family. I'm trying to think of what royal lines married others in this period (up to 1453).

if they recognize the threat that the huge centralized (compared to italy) spain & france pose for their mediterranean interests, i think that they would rather support the little dukes of italy, accursed normans they may be. besides, the age of roaming around europe and settling in anywhere with a nice beach normans is long past. so trying to vassalize naples with a couple of bases (say, around apulia) would be an sensible goal; it would also help control straits of otranto and contain the venetians. trying to conquer catholic italy will be a pain in the arse. then again, you might get mad emperors down the line obsessed with becoming the new justinian.

I think they'd rather have neither. And judging by OTL, the Sicilian Normans were stubborn about giving up "settling in anywhere with a nice beach" (well put).

Also, southern Italy (as distinct from the north) is more Orthodox, so religion shouldn't be an issue.

I hope you don't take this as attacking your suggestion, just my own thoughts don't agree with yours.
 
From what I can tell, there never was much of a chance. I'm not saying Ottoman rule helped here, but there's a split anyway.



It doesn't take a wanked Byzantium to succeed in the Balkans and/or interfere with Hungary taking places in the Balkans.



The schism existed long before the House of Osman, and depending on what the Byzantines control, there might well be a powerful, centralized Sunni state - Iran or Egypt can host one.



That was in a situation which won't come up TTL, though.

And I'm not sure they really were one big family. I'm trying to think of what royal lines married others in this period (up to 1453).



I think they'd rather have neither. And judging by OTL, the Sicilian Normans were stubborn about giving up "settling in anywhere with a nice beach" (well put).

Also, southern Italy (as distinct from the north) is more Orthodox, so religion shouldn't be an issue.

I hope you don't take this as attacking your suggestion, just my own thoughts don't agree with yours.

good god no, i was only brainstorming after all. half the fun of the forum has to be disagreeing about stuff.

but i do believe that royal family butterflies are inevitable, via russia if nothing. and mind you europe doesn't have to be one big family for centuries to come, but if the byzantines survive, there will be some doukas, komnenos, palaiologoi etc waiting to be married. they would be creeping into the royal families through non-royal noble families already. obviously, they won't marry any turks after beating them; i just brought that up to show that the can be quite willing to give away their princesses if needed.

as for islam,like i said, it's really unpredictable considering how large a role the ottomans played in islam of the era. perhaps the ultra-conservatives don't get to dominate it. perhaps it does worse and loses influence in asia. maybe even a muslim protestantism.. afaik the muslim schism is mostly a political one, with doctrine growing around the political camps. different politics = different "islams".

hmm. i guess saving the balkans could be a nice AHC, probably through serbia. still, i think that without the ottoman conquests, divergences in demographics are inevitable; not just less death (of which i'm not that sure) but you get to marry that albanian/bosnian girl now that she's not a muslim. also, no refugees fleeing from the turk - iirc there was a move to the north.

i'm generally sceptical about byzantine success even if they survive, since their internal organization seems to be problematic (the invading turks didn't find a strong state to oppose them). so outright conquest of sicily does appear a bit implausible. but should somebody else (like a hohenstaufen) get to conquer it, i think that they would be smart enough to make friends with them against the french & spanish threat.

anyways i would like to hear your outline of a surviving byzantine empire, with the manzikert POD. do you think that the empire can be salvaged? italian expansion? trebizond, crimea? relations with the catholics? but more importantly, how would it affect the rest of the world?
 
good god no, i was only brainstorming after all. half the fun of the forum has to be disagreeing about stuff.

but i do believe that royal family butterflies are inevitable, via russia if nothing. and mind you europe doesn't have to be one big family for centuries to come, but if the byzantines survive, there will be some doukas, komnenos, palaiologoi etc waiting to be married. they would be creeping into the royal families through non-royal noble families already. obviously, they won't marry any turks after beating them; i just brought that up to show that the can be quite willing to give away their princesses if needed.

But if not needed, they might well marry within the empire, or mostly in the other Orthodox states (which didn't do a lot of marriage with European royals).

Still, it's likely -some- marriages will occur, fair enough.

as for islam,like i said, it's really unpredictable considering how large a role the ottomans played in islam of the era. perhaps the ultra-conservatives don't get to dominate it. perhaps it does worse and loses influence in asia. maybe even a muslim protestantism.. afaik the muslim schism is mostly a political one, with doctrine growing around the political camps. different politics = different "islams".

Different politics may matter in some regards, but a lot of what happened happened before the Ottomans rose - they may have reinforced some things and weakened others, but only those around at their time.

hmm. i guess saving the balkans could be a nice AHC, probably through serbia. still, i think that without the ottoman conquests, divergences in demographics are inevitable; not just less death (of which i'm not that sure) but you get to marry that albanian/bosnian girl now that she's not a muslim. also, no refugees fleeing from the turk - iirc there was a move to the north.

I think you're right there. Although "saving" the Balkans sounds wrong.

i'm generally sceptical about byzantine success even if they survive, since their internal organization seems to be problematic (the invading turks didn't find a strong state to oppose them). so outright conquest of sicily does appear a bit implausible. but should somebody else (like a hohenstaufen) get to conquer it, i think that they would be smart enough to make friends with them against the french & spanish threat.

I think they'd prefer to take over the place directly than rely on people who are just as bad - as far as they're concerned - as the French and Spanish. And by bad, I mean in terms of how much harm to their interests.

France and Spain didn't project much in Sicily.

anyways i would like to hear your outline of a surviving byzantine empire, with the manzikert POD. do you think that the empire can be salvaged? italian expansion? trebizond, crimea? relations with the catholics? but more importantly, how would it affect the rest of the world?

1) Definitely.

2) Possible.

3) Trebizond is -part- of the empire until 1204. As is a southern sliver of the Crimean peninsula.

4) Depends - I doubt there's going to be be a uniform policy towards all Catholic states.

5) A lot.

In some other thread on the subject I posted some thoughts, I should find that post - but basically, Eastern and Central Europe are hugely and directly effected, Western Europe not so much, the Middle East is not going to be like OTL, and basic things like the Industrial Revolution and such will probably happen similarly to OTL (depending on other events, but Byzantine survival and prosperity in and of itself doesn't undermine them)

But it would be a very different Europe even if the West is only effected indirectly.
 
Top