The Mongols take Anatolia.....with a twist

[Ran Exilis]

Here's a little idea just came up with: in a scenario in which Mantzikert has been averted and where the Byzantines have remained in control of Anatolia, what would happen if the Mongols invade, defeat the Byzantines, and directly conquer Anatolia?

And how would such a succesful Mongol conquest of Byzantine Anatolia affect the Mongols?

 

[Ran Exilis]

Just because I have nothing better to do, I wrote a little scenario that leads up to these events...


To keep things relatively simple, the POD is that Basil II somehow gets a proper heir, with as most significant effect that the battle of Mantzikert is avoided.

The Byzantines retain their presence in Anatolia as a result, the events in the neighbouring Great Seljuk Sultanate are somewhat affected as well, but it fragments after the death of Malik Shah I just like it did in OTL.

The situation in the Middle East remains comparable to the OTL situation (a few minor differences), the situation in Central Asia remains pretty much the same as in OTL, and as a result, the Mongols invade at roughly the same time as they did in OTL.

The Byzantines fight off a number of Mongol and Khwarezmian raiding parties in eastern Anatolia during the 1220's, and they destroy the invading Khwarezmian army under Jalal ad-Din Mingburnu during the 1230's.

Then, during the mid-1230's, the Mongols invade northern Persia and the Caucasus under Chormagan, and they completely destroy all that's left of the Khwarezmian empire. In the process, the Mongols also firmly establish themselves in the Caucasus.

The Byzantines are quite concerned about the speed of the Mongol conquests and their victories over strong and sometimes much larger armies, and the Mongols -who still believe that it is their destiny to conquer the entire world- have no intention of stopping at the Byzantine border, so
a confrontation between the two is inevitable.

Somewhere during the early 1240's, the Mongols (propably under Baiyu) invade the Byzantine territories, and they find a Byzantine army, led by the emperor himself, waiting for them.

A battle ensues, and by using their old trick of the feigned retreat, the Mongols manage to inflict a serious defeat upon the Byzantines. The battle is a disaster for the Empire and the emperor himself is killed.

Following the news of the emperor's tragic death and after some dynastic squabbles, a new emperor is crowned in Constantinople, and he decides to use diplomacy instead of force. He offers to pay tribute to the Mongols and to become a vassal of the Mongols.

However, the Mongol Empire has yet to be divided in several khanates at this point, so for his negotiations, the emperor is forced to travel all the way to Qaraqorum. (in OTL, nobles who had subjugated to the Mongols and wished to negotiate with the Mongol leaders were forced to do exactly the same thing)

Because of this, the new emperor spends about two or three years away from his empire. However, his position was never very strong in his own empire, and one of his rivals takes advantage of his absence and seizes the throne.

After quite a bit of negotiating, the emperor manages to establish a treaty with the Mongols - but when he returns, he learns that a new rival emperor gained power, and that this rival emperor was actually stupid enough to defy and attack the Mongols.

And what's more, the Mongols have routed the Byzantine forces and killed the usurper, and they now control pretty much all of formerly Byzantine Asia Minor - including most of the coastal cities...



...thoughts?

 

[Abdul Hadi Pasha]

My first reaction is that the Byzantines are one of the armies that wouldn't fall for the 'ole feigned retreat tactic, being very familiar with it.

It is also inconceivable that an Emperor would travel all the way to Qaraqorum for any reason.

If the Mongols did overrun Anatolia, though, that would more or less be the end of the Byzantines as a major power as per OTL. That kind of damage can't be undone.

 

[Keenir]

Here's a little idea just came up with: in a scenario in which Mantzikert has been averted and where the Byzantines have remained in control of Anatolia, what would happen if the Mongols invade, defeat the Byzantines, and directly conquer Anatolia?

And how would such a succesful Mongol conquest of Byzantine Anatolia affect the Mongols?

well, my initial thought (which I left to ponder as much as I could of it) was that it would depend on the power politics in the Mongol Empire - do the Byzantines ally with a Christian Mongol princeling, or any Mongol princeling.

...then your ATL rightly pointed out to me that the Empire (at that point) hadn't descended into power politics.

hm, the Byzantine Emperor as a puppet king of the Mongol Emperor. wonder if we can get him to import any parts (or all) of the Mandate of Heaven.

 

[Ran Exilis]

My first reaction is that the Byzantines are one of the armies that wouldn't fall for the 'ole feigned retreat tactic, being very familiar with it.

It is also inconceivable that an Emperor would travel all the way to Qaraqorum for any reason.

Hmm, you're right - it would indeed not be very likely that an Emperor would travel so far, especially if his position wasn't that strong in the first place.
I stand corrected

..
Allright, some minor changes:

The Byzantine army doesn't fall for the feigned retreat tactic, but is defeated by the Mongol invaders due to an unfortunate set of circumstances.

The Emperor is still killed, and due to some dynastic squabbles and incapable successors, and as a result of this, Asia Minor is still overrun.

If the Mongols did overrun Anatolia, though, that would more or less be the end of the Byzantines as a major power as per OTL. That kind of damage can't be undone.

That's indeed a very likely result.

However, I'm especially interested in what would happen to such a Mongol Anatolia on the long therm.

Anatolia was entirely Greek and Christian at this point, and -as the Mongols themselves proved in OTL- nomad empires that overrun empires with more developed civilisations tend to adopt the local culture and religion and integrate (if not assimilate) into the local civilisation.

 

[Advernt]

Are you predicting the Khantate of the Greeks / Romans , a sucessor Orthodox Mongol Khantate that , in this ATL Claim to be the Roman Empire continued and the heir to the Byzantines ? If events turn out well for the Greek Anatolians , this might end up as a Byzantine Wank.

 

[Hermanubis]

Are you predicting the Khantate of the Greeks / Romans , a sucessor Orthodox Mongol Khantate that , in this ATL Claim to be the Roman Empire continued and the heir to the Byzantines ? If events turn out well for the Greek Anatolians , this might end up as a Byzantine Wank.

Its an interesting scenario, but on the other hand we have the opposite example of the Seljuk Turks conquering Anatolia and the Turkification of Asia Minor which happened in OTL, so...

 

[Ran Exilis]

Are you predicting the Khantate of the Greeks / Romans , a sucessor Orthodox Mongol Khantate that , in this ATL Claim to be the Roman Empire continued and the heir to the Byzantines ? If events turn out well for the Greek Anatolians , this might end up as a Byzantine Wank.

Yep, that's pretty much it.

And even though Anatolia may not end up being a separate khanate (it's not unlikely that it would become a province of the Il-Khanate, or an ATL equivalent thereof), it would still be an important part of wichever Khanate controls it.

What's more, at least in the OTL Il-Khanate, Mongol clans that governed large cities and important parts of the khanate had a tendency to become powerful factions within the khanate, and as the Il-Khanate crumbled, these factions became effectively independant, and some of them became empires in their own right. The Jalayirids are a good example of this.

And in this scenario, Anatolia certainly is wealthy, populous and both politically as well as economically quite important. Both before as well as after Mongol conquest, Byzantine Anatolia is most propably wealthier and and more populous than Georgia and all of the Armenian territories combined, so it is safe to assume that the clan that gains control of Anatolia would become quite powerful within the Khanate.

This is boundt to have interesting consequences, even if the Il-Khanate or its ATL equivalent remain intact. A Christian Anatolia that is ruled by Christianized Mongols would play an important role in the politics of whichever khanate it belongs to, and as a part of the Il-Khanate, it would greatly strenghten the (already relatively strong) political position of Christianity within the Il-Khanate.

Perhaps this would eventually result in the Muslim factions within the Il-Khanate being balanced out by the khanate's Christian factions...

And if the Il-Khanate falls apart ITTL like it did in OTL, with the result that Persia and southern Mesopotamia become dominated by Muslim polities, it is very likely that this Anatolian polity would become independant, and it would be quite possible that the Armenian and Georgian territories, along with (Nestorian) Christian Mongol clans in the western territories, would gravitate towards this Christian Anatolian polity.

That scenario offers some very interesting possebilities, and like Advernt already said, possibly even a (somewhat unusual) Byzantiwank...

Its an interesting scenario, but on the other hand we have the opposite example of the Seljuk Turks conquering Anatolia and the Turkification of Asia Minor which happened in OTL, so...

The main reason why the Seljuks weren't assimilated by the Byzantines in OTL was that the Seljuks were already Muslim when they invaded Anatolia, and converting to the local religion is usually a crucial step in the process of assimilation. In OTL, Islam prevented the Seljuks from converting.

Islam is a religion that's pretty much designed for preventing nomadic conquerors from converting to the religion of their subjects and assimilating.

And when the Mongols invaded the Middle East, the vast majority of them were still pagan, and therefore far more likely to convert to any of the local religions - which they in fact did in OTL Persia, Central Asia, and China, so there's no reason to assume that they wouldn't do so in Anatolia.

 

[Homer]

Its an interesting scenario, but on the other hand we have the opposite example of the Seljuk Turks conquering Anatolia and the Turkification of Asia Minor which happened in OTL, so...

I once read in this forum that during the wars between the Byzantines and the Turks it was quite common to drive quite a substantial part of the population of the opposite religion out of newly conquered territories. This naturally lead to a depopulation of the region, thus the Seljuks, with time passing by, get lost of their christian underlings by warfare. Thus they wouldn't be the standard example of invading nomads being a tiny upper class to a well-functioning community, but a nomadic people invading a rather empty country and overtaking the remnants of a formerly functioning community.
Not sure whether this is correct, though.

Now the Mongols, on the other side, would face a different situation: Their conquest of Anatolia would be very fast and pretty much complete. The Byzantines would be vassals, thus there'd be lesser wars. And they are still pagan, thus ready to take over christianity promoted by a rich vassal rather than Islam promoted by the enemy in the South and East.

 

[Advernt]

I once read in this forum that during the wars between the Byzantines and the Turks it was quite common to drive quite a substantial part of the population of the opposite religion out of newly conquered territories. This naturally lead to a depopulation of the region, thus the Seljuks, with time passing by, get lost of their christian underlings by warfare. Thus they wouldn't be the standard example of invading nomads being a tiny upper class to a well-functioning community, but a nomadic people invading a rather empty country and overtaking the remnants of a formerly functioning community.
Not sure whether this is correct, though.

Now the Mongols, on the other side, would face a different situation: Their conquest of Anatolia would be very fast and pretty much complete. The Byzantines would be vassals, thus there'd be lesser wars. And they are still pagan, thus ready to take over christianity promoted by a rich vassal rather than Islam promoted by the enemy in the South and East.

I suspect that any Christian Orthodox Khantate would be viewed by Europe in a similar manner as the Ottomans . We could have the seige of Vienna conducted by an ambitious Khan / Emperor seeking to reunite the west along with his vast holdings in Persia , Anatolia , the Balkans , the Caucasus and the Levant . Ofcourse , it is quite unlikely to a certain extent , and history in this ATL will diverge sharply from our own , but I suspect that an Orthodox Greek Khantate might interact with Europe in similar ways as the Ottomans had ...

 

[el t]

Asia Minor

I don't think they could have held it indefinitely. Especially if the Byzantines maintained a strong presence in Europe. The Mongols were much too far from their homeland and would only have left a thin garrison in Asia Minor. Eventually the local Greeks there would have revolted and expelled them. A slow but steady type of reconquest, such was what happened in Spain could have come into play.

 

[Homer]

I suspect that any Christian Orthodox Khantate would be viewed by Europe in a similar manner as the Ottomans . We could have the seige of Vienna conducted by an ambitious Khan / Emperor seeking to reunite the west along with his vast holdings in Persia , Anatolia , the Balkans , the Caucasus and the Levant . Ofcourse , it is quite unlikely to a certain extent , and history in this ATL will diverge sharply from our own , but I suspect that an Orthodox Greek Khantate might interact with Europe in similar ways as the Ottomans had ...

No. Of course, the Anatolian Khanate might conquer large parts of the Balkans, and maybe it will siege Vienna. However, the principal difference is that the anatolian khanate is a christian state. Thus you could compare it to Russia, but not to an empire of heathens! With the anatolian khanate, we'd have normal christian warfare, as before the ottomans between the balkan states.

 

[Keenir]

I don't think they could have held it indefinitely. Especially if the Byzantines maintained a strong presence in Europe. The Mongols were much too far from their homeland and would only have left a thin garrison in Asia Minor. Eventually the local Greeks there would have revolted and expelled them.

which Greeks? even in 1000-1400, there was no single "Greek" people.

 

[Tocomocho]

The Mongols cannot cross the Sea of Marmara. So unless they go for a king-size strategy and invade Thrace from the north at the same time they attack Anatolia, instead of just raiding the later, Constantinople would be safe. It's debatable also that the Byzantine emperor would take the personal command of his forces and die in battle a la Valente though even if this happens some other guy would just proclaim himself new emperor in the capital. In essence, I don't think that the Byzantine Empire would be replaced immediately by a Christian Khanate, though there could be an outcome in which Byzantium survives in Europe while said Christian Khanate is established in Asia Minor, and later goes to Europe the way the Ottomans did: as Byzantine "allies" against the invading Serbian and Bulgarians.

 

[Max Sinister]

IOTL the Mongols came as far as Bulgaria. So yes, a pincer strategy against Constantinople could work.