Ottoman Interregnum: Could the Ottomans Have Collapsed in the 1400s?

[eliphas8]

So technically we have the Karamanids and Mamluks against the Jalayrids. Then I got a couple more questions: are the Karamanids and Timurids enemies? Can the Byzantines still collapse, even without the Ottomans? More importantly, can the Karamanids succeed or fail in conquering the Balkans?

1. The timurid where only really a big deal for about three years before their borders receded after Timurs death and he isn't gonna live much longer after the start of the interregnum so they didn't have time to really make friends or enemies.
2. They had already collapsed by then and where living on borrowed time well before Timurs appearance.
3. My guess is barring some out of the ballpark luck they won't succeed in the Balkans long term, the Karaminids don't have as good a military system as the Ottomans did.

 

[MarshalBraginsky]

So with the Karamanids doing bad in the Balkans, why not have another power conquer the dying Byzantine Empire instead of the Ottomans? I could either think of the Bulgarian Empire or even the Serbian Empire that can conquer them.

 

[MarshalBraginsky]

I just am not sure which Balkan power could actually conquer Constantinople other than the nations that I've described without the Ottomans, and I doubt the Karamanids would be as successful in capturig Constantinople.

 

[eliphas8]

I just am not sure which Balkan power could actually conquer Constantinople other than the nations that I've described without the Ottomans, and I doubt the Karamanids would be as successful in capturig Constantinople.

Bulgaria or Serbia are the ones I think are most likely, they will probably end up decclaring themselves emperors of the Romans and take up court in Constantinople much like the ottomans did, although they may Hellenism much more than the Turks did because Greek was still a prestige language and a sign of high culture. By the way I see Bulgaria as the more likely conqueror, Serbia had been a disorganized wreck since Dusans era ended.

 

[MarshalBraginsky]

So is it preferable if Bulgaria or Serbia conquers Constantinople? With either one of them laying claim as Third Rome, Muscovy would have to toe the Bulgarian or Serbian line then.

 

[eliphas8]

So is it preferable if Bulgaria or Serbia conquers Constantinople? With either one of them laying claim as Third Rome, Muscovy would have to toe the Bulgarian or Serbian line then.

Really it won't be very different either way, there won't be the same exodus of Greek artisans with either group since they are Orthodox and Greek silk and art will be in demand. And no, what'll probably end up happening is that the Bulgarian or Serbian Tsar declares an ecumeral council who's job will be to work out a compromise where Russia gets control over the church in their territory. Also you haven't mentioned it but Trebizond and Georgia will likely form a dynastic union at some point. Also if you want you can just PM me given how this seems to mostly be you asking me questions about what will happen.

 

[Elfwine]

So is it preferable if Bulgaria or Serbia conquers Constantinople? With either one of them laying claim as Third Rome, Muscovy would have to toe the Bulgarian or Serbian line then.

Either one of them would claim to be a continuation of the Second Rome, not a Third Rome.

Also, Bulgaria is not exactly in any better shape than Serbia.

 

[eliphas8]

Either one of them would claim to be a continuation of the Second Rome, not a Third Rome.

Also, Bulgaria is not exactly in any better shape than Serbia.

It's also just more natural expansion, if either one got their shit together the Bulgarians are the ones who have the easier path to invade, also I just realized it may well be Wallachia given how the Bulgarians where annexed by the Ottomans by that point and the Wallachians would be in a good position to sweep down and capture both.

 

[MarshalBraginsky]

And only a few people mentioned a Wallachia wank, but that may not end well if Vlad Tepes lives in the same time period as the Ottoman Interregnum. Not unless we would like to see a Byzantine entity ruled by the House of Draculesti, but this is just speculation on my part.

 

[Avitus]

And only a few people mentioned a Wallachia wank, but that may not end well if Vlad Tepes lives in the same time period as the Ottoman Interregnum. Not unless we would like to see a Byzantine entity ruled by the House of Draculesti, but this is just speculation on my part.

I wonder if you read chapter II in the TL in my sig

 

[eliphas8]

I wonder if you read chapter II in the TL in my sig

Actually your TL is what gave me that idea, I still say you underestimate Ottoman power at the time and exactly how good their army is but that idea in and of itself was perfectly workable.

 

[Avitus]

Actually your TL is what gave me that idea, I still say you underestimate Ottoman power at the time and exactly how good their army is but that idea in and of itself was perfectly workable.

That is a fair criticism of my views, though to be fair the Ottomans are alive and thriving in Anatolia and Syria in my TL, since it was mostly civil war that lost the Balkans for them.

 

[MarshalBraginsky]

What idea?

 

[Elfwine]

What idea?

Wallachia being the power to take what remains of Byzantium, apparently.

I'd note that if you break the Ottomans in the early 1400s, Vlad is going to grow up in very different circumstances - heck, some would argue he'd be butterflied (born 1431).

And he's not even the oldest son, either way. This doesn't mean he can't take power, but one shouldn't assume he would in this world.

 

[eliphas8]

That is a fair criticism of my views, though to be fair the Ottomans are alive and thriving in Anatolia and Syria in my TL, since it was mostly civil war that lost the Balkans for them.

Oh, well then never mind, I really should get back to reading it then.

 

[MarshalBraginsky]

Would no Vlad Tepes be a bad thing or a good thing for Wallachia in the long run? Since Vlad Tepes is just as cruel as Ivan the Terrible, though Ivan doesn't impale his opponents in a whim. I mean, how can the House of Draculesti actually survive?

 

[Tongera]

Would no Vlad Tepes be a bad thing or a good thing for Wallachia in the long run? Since Vlad Tepes is just as cruel as Ivan the Terrible, though Ivan doesn't impale his opponents in a whim. I mean, how can the House of Draculesti actually survive?

I thought he bought a lot of trade to Wallachia?

 

[Elfwine]

Would no Vlad Tepes be a bad thing or a good thing for Wallachia in the long run? Since Vlad Tepes is just as cruel as Ivan the Terrible, though Ivan doesn't impale his opponents in a whim. I mean, how can the House of Draculesti actually survive?

"Who replaces him?"

That's the question. "No Vlad Tepes" doesn't necessarily mean a good replacement.

This scenario probably puts Wallachia in a very different position even if it doesn't advance south - it won't be allied with the Ottomans, and thus won't draw negative Hungarian attention (at least not for that).

 

[MarshalBraginsky]

There's also the question of how to deal with the Saxons in Wallachia as well, though without Vlad Tepes around they may end up surviving a bit longer. If there is no Vlad Tepes, then that definitely butterflies the all-known Count Dracula vampire story.

 

[BBadolato]

the Ottoman Interregnum took place in 1405 Vlad Tepes I don't think was in power, the problem with a Wallachia wank is how do you resolve the struggles between the Danesti and Draculesti lines, and make the Wallachian Vivodeship stable.