Timur Defeated In Syria

I just finished the third volume of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire and in it, Gibbon comments that "he (Tamerlane) was rudely encountered, and almost overthrown," by the armies of Egypt."

So what if the Mamelukes had managed to defeat Tamerlane in Syria, after the destruction of Aleppo but before the destruction of Damascus?
 

Nikephoros

Banned
Byzantines croak sooner

One result- Ottomans do not suffer from Tamerlane, and they manage to sieze the remnants of the Byzantine Empire
 
Based on my experience in EUIII/IN with the Timurids, without a large, mobile army, they'll quickly fall apart into little Khanates and disintegrate. Khorasan, Khiva, Baluchistan, Durrani, Persia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Iraq, Jayalrids, and both White and Black Sheep are known to arise from the Timurids' ashes, but I don't know how historically accurate this part of the game is.
 

Susano

Banned
Based on my experience in EUIII/IN with the Timurids, without a large, mobile army, they'll quickly fall apart into little Khanates and disintegrate. Khorasan, Khiva, Baluchistan, Durrani, Persia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Iraq, Jayalrids, and both White and Black Sheep are known to arise from the Timurids' ashes, but I don't know how historically accurate this part of the game is.

Very. Timurs empire did more or les simmidatly crumble upon his death, and then even more as time passed on, just like the old minikhanates he rose from... And Id say it would take a bit more then just having a sufficiently mobile enough military to prevent this, it would either take deep social/politcial changes (but then, Timur never really was a reformer... he never really was much of a ruler period, just a constant raider) or another "great man"...
 
Very. Timurs empire did more or les simmidatly crumble upon his death, and then even more as time passed on, just like the old minikhanates he rose from... And Id say it would take a bit more then just having a sufficiently mobile enough military to prevent this, it would either take deep social/politcial changes (but then, Timur never really was a reformer... he never really was much of a ruler period, just a constant raider) or another "great man"...

Well, in EU3 you pretty much reform automatically, albeit over time and very slowly. So it's more of a case of keeping the rebels down until you don't have to worry about them.
 
Based on my experience in EUIII/IN with the Timurids, without a large, mobile army, they'll quickly fall apart into little Khanates and disintegrate. Khorasan, Khiva, Baluchistan, Durrani, Persia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Iraq, Jayalrids, and both White and Black Sheep are known to arise from the Timurids' ashes, but I don't know how historically accurate this part of the game is.

The Timurid empire indeed did fall apart quite quickly, but that was mainly because Timur Lenk never managed to establish a properly centralized administration in his empire.

He usually forced subjugated kings and princes to become vassals, and as one can expect, most of those local rulers rose up in revolt as soon as Timur's hordes were gone.

A good example of this is the Georgian king Bagrat V; he was captured by Timur Lenk and agreed to become a Muslim and one of Timur's vassals, but as soon as he returned to Georgia, he and his son organized a revolt, routed the local Timurid garrisons, and openly renounced Islam.

..
The list of states that that game claims to have arisen from the ruins of the Timurid empire is partially correct, but there are a few rather obvious mistakes.

The Jalayirids, for example; their state was a successor state of the Il-Khanate, and their power actually came to an end because of Timur's invasion.

A few remnants of the Jalayirid clan survived Timur's invasion, but that's about it.

Khoresan was (and still is) the geographic name for the area of northeast Persia and western Afghanistan, but unless I'm very mistaken, it was not the name of a state.

Iraq - pretty much the same story as Khoresan; back then, "Iraq" was merely a geographic name. After the Timurids, the Black Sheep and White Sheep Turkmen hordes conquered Iraq.

However, the Black Sheep and White Sheep Turkmen states did arise as a result of the decline of the Timurids.

And your list is also correct about the Khanate of Khiva, which arose during or shortly after the collapse of the Timurid state in Central Asia.

Azerbaijan was actually divided into several small states, such as Shirvan (which was still a more or less Iranian state at this point), and various small Turkish khanates.

As for Armenia: unless I'm very mistaken, all that was left of Armenia at this point was a small principality in Artsakh/Nagorno Karabach. And rather than emerging from the ruins of Timur's empire, that principality survived in spite of the Timurid invasion.

The Durrani's - well, they arose in the 18th century, several centuries after the Timurids. (unless you count the Mughals as Timurids, of course - but as the Durrani's arose long after the Mughals had lost their power in Afghanistan, that would be irrelevant)

Baluchistan was, to my knowledge, not a unified state at this point.

To my knowledge, the only times that there was some semblance of political unity in Baluchistan were those times when some powerful warlord/leader of a tribal confederation managed to subdue and vassalize his rivals for a few decades or so, and that's about it.

And as for Persia; the Timurids lost most of Persia after the death of Timur Lenk.

Several minor states established themselves in Persia at this point, and it would not be united again until the rise of the Safavids.
 
Back to the subject...

The defeat of Tamerlane would take place in 1399, before his defeat fo the Ottomans. Without the Ottoman Empire temporarily being split into four and suffering civil war, when do you all think Constantinople will fall?

The Mamelukes are also in better shape and Damascus is still rich and heavily-populated. Georgia and Armenia also don't get ravaged.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timur's_invasions_of_Georgia

Baghdad doesn't get sacked either.

What effects do you think this will have?
 
Based on my experience in EUIII/IN with the Timurids, without a large, mobile army, they'll quickly fall apart into little Khanates and disintegrate. Khorasan, Khiva, Baluchistan, Durrani, Persia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Iraq, Jayalrids, and both White and Black Sheep are known to arise from the Timurids' ashes, but I don't know how historically accurate this part of the game is.

I'd say Iraq and Durrani are the only two that would not arise ITTL. Mainly because Iraq was dominated by the Jaylarids and the Koyun Turks (Sheep Turks... :D), and Durrani did not come around for another few centuries.
 
I'd say Iraq and Durrani are the only two that would not arise ITTL. Mainly because Iraq was dominated by the Jaylarids and the Koyun Turks (Sheep Turks... :D), and Durrani did not come around for another few centuries.

Usually the Jaylarids arise around Basra in the southern part of Iraq, whereas Iraq itself comes along in the north around Mosul and in Kurdistan.
 
Usually the Jaylarids arise around Basra in the southern part of Iraq, whereas Iraq itself comes along in the north around Mosul and in Kurdistan.

Interesting.. if the Karakoyun Turks don't have Mosul, where to they come up?

(I don't have IN yet.)
 
Top