No ottomans, who, if anyone replaces the Bzyantines

If there are no ottomans, what is the most likely to happen to byzantium? (pick 2)

  • It survives with more or less the samesize

    Votes: 14 19.4%
  • It gets replaced by Serbia in the balkans & by turkic beyliks in anatolia

    Votes: 19 26.4%
  • It gets replaced by Bulgaria in the balkans & by turkic beyliks in anatolia

    Votes: 18 25.0%
  • It gets sort of replaced by Hungary in the balkans & by turkic beyliks in anatolia

    Votes: 5 6.9%
  • greek byzantine successor states in anatolia only (like otl trebizond)

    Votes: 3 4.2%
  • greek byzantine successors in both the balkans & anatolia

    Votes: 10 13.9%
  • It survives in a reduced form

    Votes: 32 44.4%

  • Total voters
    72
The main question is just the title. The way I see it, post-manzikert, the Byzantines were more or less doomed to decline (feel free to correct this if you see it as wrong) but without the ottomans, they would not have done so as quickly and, of course, if they did decline, would be replaced by another power (or possibly a few more, one filling the void in the Balkans & others or one other filling their role in the middle east.

The Serbs, Bulgars, Hungarians, and others had the potential to become the successors to Byzantium (with more of a cultural connection to their predecessors than the Ottos had, some of them could arguably be considered a "foreign dynasty" of the same empire) if the Ottomans had not steamrolled the whole Balkan peninsula.

So yeah who replaces the Byzzies if not the turks?

Now, this question is actually for a tl with a much smaller pod with huge butterflies, so if you want to be extra helpful, when answering assume that the 4th crusade either doesn't happen at all or is for all intents and purposes not the same crusade that we got.

If you answer, thanks for the help.
 
A - The Romans could easily have survived, but OTL after the death Manouel I they kept rolling 1s in everything.

That said, I think that with no Ottomans the Roman may have been able to hold on longer, as the Ottomans were really the only ghazi state in Anatolia. Eventually, they will be absorbed by their Balkan neighbors, most likely Bulgaria or Serbia. Overtime, breakaway states will begin to develop as pronoi families establish independent states. My money's on the Kantkazounoi in Morea and the Tarkhaneiotei either in Anatolia or Lesbos.
 
A - The Romans could easily have survived, but OTL after the death Manouel I they kept rolling 1s in everything.

That said, I think that with no Ottomans the Roman may have been able to hold on longer, as the Ottomans were really the only ghazi state in Anatolia. Eventually, they will be absorbed by their Balkan neighbors, most likely Bulgaria or Serbia. Overtime, breakaway states will begin to develop as pronoi families establish independent states. My money's on the Kantkazounoi in Morea and the Tarkhaneiotei either in Anatolia or Lesbos.

When you say Anatolia, do you mean all of the Byzantine's Anatolian possessions or most of them or just the main western part?
 
Depends on when the Ottomans collapse, or on when the hegemony of a non-Ottoman power solidifies and keeps enough momentum to create a cohesive hegemony. Any of the scenarios you described, imo, could have happened with any sufficient PoD involving (in somewhat respective order) the early Palaiologoi, a later death of Stefan Dusan, a less thorough feudal balkanization of the Second Bulgarian Empire (no Vidin and Dobruja despotates), more success for Hungary's anti-Ottoman crusades (Nicopolis, Varna), Alexios Philantropenos' revolt succeeding, etc.
 

Arkocento

Donor
Assuming we use the interpretation of "No Ottomans" means that the Region the Ottomans existed in just failed to have any sort of Ghazi-esque state there.
Therefore at minimum, the Battle of Bapheus is butterflied away, meaning the Catalan company is either butterflied away as well, or has a different experience.
Given the fact that they arrived in Constantinople less then six months after the battle, ill assume they still exist. Therefore I expect the company to absolutely run rampant across Asia Minor in a fashion that does two things
1. Leaves the Beyliks of Aydin, Karasid, and maybe the Mentenese absolutely in Chaos.
2. Given the Byzantine morale is not as broken as it was prior to Bapheus, I'd expect a somewhat more vigorous push by the Byzantines to regain control of the Aegean coast of Anatolia.
All of this shifts the situation between the Catalans, and Byzantines enough to make me question if Andronicus would call them back, or perhaps simply push them further into the interior, in a sort of "let them perish against the Turks, and let us pick up the pieces sort of fashion"
The path from there gets murky, I'd say its easily reasonable to have the Byzantines maintain stability at this point if they avoid a few civil wars, One of which frankly could be precipitated by Michael IX living longer then Andronicus II.
Do this and the initial civil war that gave The Serbian empire control of damn near all of Macedonia. I cannot stress enough how much Byzantine fortunes were ruined by the civil wars that mostly just occurred because Andronicus didnt like his Grandson.
Make the Civil wars go away, which can be somewhat butterflied if the Ottomans simply vanish and the Byzantines can easily maintain themselves as a regional power, at least until the end of the 14th century. Beyond that I wont hedge any bets
 

Deleted member 67076

The Germiyanids, if we're picking Beyliks.

Stephan Dusan is an option (some considered crowning him emperor of the Romans if I remember right).

Maybe Bulgaria if Kaloyan is a bit luckier after the Fourth Crusade.

Can't think of too many other candidates. Though I contest the notion of inevitable decline post Manzikert.
 
The Germiyanids, if we're picking Beyliks.

Stephan Dusan is an option (some considered crowning him emperor of the Romans if I remember right).

He was crowned emperor of the romans but died about a day's march away from Constantinople and his son was too incompetent to keep the empire together, let alone expand so the Nemanjićs never had anything with which to back their claim.

Can't think of too many other candidates. Though I contest the notion of inevitable decline post Manzikert.

When would u say was the point of no return?
 
Also, who do y'all think is most likely to end up with Constantinople? A Greek successor state or a foreign power?
 

Arkocento

Donor
If there is any sort of a recovery that allows for the population to build up to the level it was prior to the Fourth Crusade, then at bare minimum it will end up being Greek after the inevitable rise of nationalism.
Before that Its possible that Bulgaria, another state from Anatolia, holding it for an extended period of time.
 
Also, who do y'all think is most likely to end up with Constantinople? A Greek successor state or a foreign power?
Depends heavily, imo. A Balkans-based orthodox empire (Serbia or Bulgaria) will likely want to directly annex the city (either through direct occupation and/or pressuring the Byzantine aristocracy into a dynastic marriage like what Simeon I of Bulgaria tried to do back in the 10th century), Catholic Hungary will likely try to keep the Byzantines as a puppet in Thrace, with the Venetians as watchdogs on the side, seeming as it's a bit too far from their center of power. Any Anatolian Turkish beylik with as much ambition as OTL's Ottomans will have trouble conquering Constantinople if their eastern flank isn't secure enough, and i think business in a divided Anatolia would involve a bit too many regional struggles to allow for a "jihad of the beyliks against eastern Rum" to occur.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 67076

He was crowned emperor of the romans but died about a day's march away from Constantinople and his son was too incompetent to keep the empire together, let alone expand so the Nemanjićs never had anything with which to back their claim.
Well thats... anticlimactic.

Does have me wondering though what an extra 10 years and all that extra cash/bureaucrats from the Greeks would do.

When would u say was the point of no return?
Post Second Palaiologian Civil War. Empire burnt through everything in that one- manpower, money, allies, government control, etc. I guess you can squeeze things out a bit longer if Timur crushes the Ottomans but the safe bet for me is 1341.
 
We've had topics not long ago about this... so in short:

- Another Beylik in Anatolia or a Roman ally against the Serbs. There are enough Beyliks to replace the Ottomans

- If they fail then Serbia has an era that dominates the Balkans until it gets divided. Hungary will be dominant by the second half of the 15th century. Catholicism will prevail.

Hungarian domination is also given even when the Romans recover Greece. A Tzimiskes alike Emperor could recover Bulgaria and let the Tatars wreak Havoc in Transylvania to divert Hungarian attention. Offering Princesses to the Khan. But such Emperors are rare and hardly are tolerable by other nobles.
 
Top