So, historically, what countries do you think had the potential to become great powers/empires but remained weak and (relatively) insignificant on the world stage instead of becoming great empires? What PODs would have made said "empires which never were" develop and why? What of said "empires which never were" do you think were the most fascinating and why, then?
What countries could have become great powers/empires but didn't?
- Thread starter Whiteshore
- Start date
-
- Tags
- empire great power potential
Flanders was traditionally very rich. It may not have become a super power, but I could see it becoming on par with the Dutch colonial empire.
The territory of the Catholic church is vast and sporadically placed but certainly worth being called a great power. Or do you mean more like a Caliphate?
Grey Wolf
Donor
The Papal States in central Italy were a temporal holding of the church. It seems curious to me that they never had any colonies, took over anybody else's etc.
The Cholas of southern India could have theoretically become a substantial colonial power, with influence extending to Indonesia and Africa.
Their decline is something i can't comprehend fully, though.
Their decline is something i can't comprehend fully, though.
Of course, term "great empire" is very broad but how about a little bit different fate of the Great Princedom of Lithuania? By the time of Vitold (Vytautas the Great - mid-XIV early XV centuries) Lithuania expanded to include, in modern terms. Belorussia, most of Ukraine, and Western Russia (Smolensk region). Plus, Vitold was recognized as an overlord of Novgorodian Republic and "Protector" of the Princedom of Moscow (hold by his grandson under the regency of Vitold's daughter).
At some point there was a real possibility for him to go further: by an agreement with an exiled ruler of the Golden Horde, Totkhamish, upon restoration he would acknowledge himself as Vitold's vassal and pass to him the rights of the sovereignship over the Russian lands. The plan failed because on the opposite side Vitold had Edigu, founder of the Nogai Horde and presumably the last great Mongolian general. Defeat at Worskla River cost Vitold dearly, especially in the terms of his greater dependency from Poland. But Edigu was a "subjective factor": he could die prior to the battle or he could be brought on Vitold's side by a promise of making his horde an independent emirate. Vitold is victorious, his prestige is skyrocketing and he is an official supreme ruler of all Russian lands and of the Golden Horde's territories stretching to the Ural Mountains.
At that point he has few relatively simple things to do:
1st, arranging for an early demise of his brother, Sigismund Kęstutaitis, and his cousin Švitrigaila (if I missed some other male members of the family, kill them as well; of course, except for Jagello). That would be well within the scope of acceptable of this nice family.
2nd, to stick to his alliance with the Teutonic Order against Poland and stop meddling in Samogitia: this tribal area was not worthy of trouble and spoiled relations with the only force which could support Lithuanian independence from Poland.
3rd, while remaining a Catholic would be a prudent thing to maintain the good relations with Teutonic Order, take care that the Orthodox nobility (and population in general) on his lands have exactly the same rights as the Catholics.
4th, use his Teutonic allies to achieve recognition of his complete independence from Poland. There could be something of an "reverse Grunwald" with the Polish forces facing alliance of the Teutonic Order, Lithuania, with more Russian contingents than in OTL, and some Tatar contingents followed by an extensive pillaging campaign in the Polish territories by the members of alliance. Unhappiness of his Polish subjects could force Jagello to drop his (and his successors') claims to the Lithuanian throne.
5th, guarantee that the Grand Duchy is inherited by his grandson (at an absence of other male claimants) and to do something to formulate the ...er... "progressive" rules of succession: from father to son rather than from brother to brother. This means prevalence of the Orthodox Church but, with the half-sane rulers, the rights of the Catholic minority in Lithuania proper are not endangered.
As a result, by 1430 you have an empire, biggest in Europe, stretching from the Baltic Sea to, in practical terms, upper Volga River and, with its vassal states, all the way to Ural Mountains and, potentially, all the way to Western Kazakhstan (terminology "Gold", "Blue" and "white" Hordes has multiple interpretations).
Koprulu Mustafa Pasha
Gone Fishin'
Holy Roman Empire. More centralised and you'd have a monster in Europe.
United Kingdom of Portugal, Brazil and the Algarves. Its breakup essentially broke Lisbon's power, but had it survived you could see a pluricontinental superpower ripe to dominate the 19th century, a truly integrated empire unlike anything the world had seen before. It could even have acted as an inspiration to actually implement Britain's Imperial Federation...
Armenia could have been a much bigger deal long after Tigranes the Great. Armenians inhabited a massive swath of the Mideast for at least a thousand years (not saying they were the majority in all of it, though), including most of Eastern Anatolia, the Armenian Highlands extending into Georgia, and northern Syria up to and including Antioch. Their culture was highly developed very early on, including the creation of their own alphabet by Mesrop Mashtots in the 5th century as well as extensive construction of religious buildings across their historical territory in that era.
So what doomed them to weakness and then outright destruction? I’d argue internal divisions, at least in the medieval era. Armenia was most often divided into weak minor kingdoms when it was not annexed by one of its powerful neighbors. If they had unified most of their territory they could have at least maintained their independence like Georgia IMO.
So what doomed them to weakness and then outright destruction? I’d argue internal divisions, at least in the medieval era. Armenia was most often divided into weak minor kingdoms when it was not annexed by one of its powerful neighbors. If they had unified most of their territory they could have at least maintained their independence like Georgia IMO.
This is a pretty standard and popular Lithuaniawank scenario, but, after analyzing it further a number of times, I've noticed that it has a bunch of problems which stand in the way of this being easy:
1. Medieval Lithuania did not allow inheritance through females (in this case, Sophia of Moscow) - even if the grandson may be male, there is no OTL example of this ever happening, and in OTL, inheritance through Sophia after Vytautas's death was not even considered, hinting that the traditions of inheritance was completely agnatic. Obviously, bigger army diplomacy applies, but Moscow and Vasily's claim on the throne would find little support in Lithuania, even if Vytautas were to, for some reason, endorse it.
2. Medieval Lithuania did not allow Orthodox princes to inherit, either. This is the reason why the inheritance after Gediminas and later Algirdas tended to skip a bunch of alive sons (both Algirdas and Jogaila had alive older brothers), because they were Orthodox. Again, bigger army diplomacy still applies (and Andrew of Polotsk actually did try such a strategy to get around this clause OTL, but he failed), but the same problems remain.
3. There is no chance that the Lithuanians would ever abandon Samogitia. Disregarding the severe sentimental value of having had to defend it for over a hundred years, and the fact that Samogitia had been a consistent and reliable base of support for Gediminid grand dukes against rival claimants, and that the Samogitians had practically leaped back into Lithuania's hands, a Teutonic border on the Nevėžis river is pretty terrible for Lithuania - it forces them to abandon their ambitions of acquiring a Baltic Sea port, something they had desired for decades and for good reason, and sets the Teutonic border with them quite literally next to the heartland of the Lithuanian state. Hell, Kaunas, one of their most important castles, would be 10 kilometers away from the border.
4. Such a scenario requires a much, much different Vytautas from the one we had in OTL. Vytautas was a stubborn and opportunistic glory hound, not necessarily a competent administrator, diplomat or even all that great of a military commander. In addition, offing Švitrigaila and Žygimantas, both of whom were loyal minor periphery dukes at the time (more Žygimantas, less Švitrigaila, but in 1430, this applies to both), is too much of a hindsight move.
All good points but you are sticking too much to OTL. 
I did not say that it would be too "easy", just that each of the steps would be relatively simple (aka, would not require the extremely convoluted actions) to accomplish.
I'm not aware that at this time Lithuania had well-regulated written laws of succession similar to the Salic Law. Established tradition is a serious consideration but this is why I explicitly added murder of the obvious male competitors. The difference with OTL is not only in this but in a completely different Lithuanian-Muscovite relations: in OTL Princedom of Moscow was independent from Lithuania while in ATL it is a part (vassal state) of the Greater Lithuania. "Support in Lithuania" is a tricky subject: which part of it? Lithuania proper is a relatively small and not the most advanced part of Vitold's "empire" and most of the territories are Slavic with their own rules. Vitold takes care of explicitly creating a new entity, independent Greater Lithuania in which he can establish the new rules both by using military force and by pitching various parts against each other.
This is anything but a fact: conversion process just started and Vitold was baptized 3 times (most probably based upon the political expediency): 1382 as a Catholic, 1384 - as an Orthodox, 1386 - again as a Catholic. Nobility in the Belorussian and Ukrainian territories was predominantly Orthodox and ethnic Lithuanians still were a minority (especially in the "Greater Lithuania") with the pagan past being very recent past for them to became the Catholic fanatics.
As you keep repeating, "the big army" diplomacy matters a lot and if the Catholics are not losing anything, their resistance should not be too strong.
Except that Vitold routinely used it as a bargaining chip and officially ceded it to the Order. The only thing he had to do was to stay away from their rebellions and the rest would be Order's problem. With Vitold controlling Novgorod, the issue of access to the Baltic coast is not a problem and the rest, including the sentimental values and proximity to Kaunas, would be of a secondary importance with the center of the "empire" moving Eastward.
Of course, it does and this makes most of the difference. OTOH, he was, as you acknowledged, a capable and opportunistic person so adding a little bit of an extra cynicism does not make him a completely different person. Neither is killing the potential competitors something out of a realm of reality: his own father, Keistut, was imprisoned and strangled by Jagello's order and Vitold could use the same methods to deal with the potential competition to his successors (list of which was short and well-known).
I did not say that it would be too "easy", just that each of the steps would be relatively simple (aka, would not require the extremely convoluted actions) to accomplish.
I'm not aware that at this time Lithuania had well-regulated written laws of succession similar to the Salic Law. Established tradition is a serious consideration but this is why I explicitly added murder of the obvious male competitors. The difference with OTL is not only in this but in a completely different Lithuanian-Muscovite relations: in OTL Princedom of Moscow was independent from Lithuania while in ATL it is a part (vassal state) of the Greater Lithuania. "Support in Lithuania" is a tricky subject: which part of it? Lithuania proper is a relatively small and not the most advanced part of Vitold's "empire" and most of the territories are Slavic with their own rules. Vitold takes care of explicitly creating a new entity, independent Greater Lithuania in which he can establish the new rules both by using military force and by pitching various parts against each other.
This is anything but a fact: conversion process just started and Vitold was baptized 3 times (most probably based upon the political expediency): 1382 as a Catholic, 1384 - as an Orthodox, 1386 - again as a Catholic. Nobility in the Belorussian and Ukrainian territories was predominantly Orthodox and ethnic Lithuanians still were a minority (especially in the "Greater Lithuania") with the pagan past being very recent past for them to became the Catholic fanatics.
As you keep repeating, "the big army" diplomacy matters a lot and if the Catholics are not losing anything, their resistance should not be too strong.
Except that Vitold routinely used it as a bargaining chip and officially ceded it to the Order. The only thing he had to do was to stay away from their rebellions and the rest would be Order's problem. With Vitold controlling Novgorod, the issue of access to the Baltic coast is not a problem and the rest, including the sentimental values and proximity to Kaunas, would be of a secondary importance with the center of the "empire" moving Eastward.
Of course, it does and this makes most of the difference. OTOH, he was, as you acknowledged, a capable and opportunistic person so adding a little bit of an extra cynicism does not make him a completely different person. Neither is killing the potential competitors something out of a realm of reality: his own father, Keistut, was imprisoned and strangled by Jagello's order and Vitold could use the same methods to deal with the potential competition to his successors (list of which was short and well-known).
Last edited:
The Korean peninsula's host to a fair number of people (around France's during 15th century, by some estimates), mineral resources, and historical interactions (conquest and getting conquered) with Manchuria. Earlier unification of the peninsula, further instability in China, and not pissing off every major power that came into the region (the Mongol, Japanese, Manchu, European imperial powers) perhaps could've seen a Korean empire hold significant lasting control over Northeast Asia for at least a little while longer than the Goguryeo.
Say Gwangaeto the Great or Jangsu definitely cement Goguryeo dominance over the southern states, then take more advantage of the 16 Kingdoms Period to gain more ground in China.
Or if the Goryeo accept Mongol supremacy instead of executing their emissaries and only giving up after 7 invasions. Then partake in the Mongol invasions of Japan with some more fervor, with the resources and manpower that OTL had been destroyed in the invasion, and not get scattered by typhoons and wiped out in detail by the Japanese (not that a full conquest is likely but subjugating Kyushu and having it transferred to the kings of Goryeo is a significant gain, due to all Sino-Japanese trade being filtered through the Goryeo). Then Korea as a naval power would be possible.
Shame about Korea is that it's had plenty of opportunities, with its powerful neighbors frequently disunited in civil wars, but it hasn't ever been able to really take full advantage of them and always ended up going back to square one by the end.
Say Gwangaeto the Great or Jangsu definitely cement Goguryeo dominance over the southern states, then take more advantage of the 16 Kingdoms Period to gain more ground in China.
Or if the Goryeo accept Mongol supremacy instead of executing their emissaries and only giving up after 7 invasions. Then partake in the Mongol invasions of Japan with some more fervor, with the resources and manpower that OTL had been destroyed in the invasion, and not get scattered by typhoons and wiped out in detail by the Japanese (not that a full conquest is likely but subjugating Kyushu and having it transferred to the kings of Goryeo is a significant gain, due to all Sino-Japanese trade being filtered through the Goryeo). Then Korea as a naval power would be possible.
Shame about Korea is that it's had plenty of opportunities, with its powerful neighbors frequently disunited in civil wars, but it hasn't ever been able to really take full advantage of them and always ended up going back to square one by the end.
If the Habsburgs never inherit Burgundy this would probably happen as Flanders was the center of Burgundy. Charles V. grew up in Flanders for example. The latest POD for this could be an alternative divison of his empire in which his successor as emperor also rules from the Netherlands.
Creating a new entity out of Lithuania sounds a little bit like Vytautas, maybe, but I think you are downplaying the importance of Lithuania Propria somewhat. Sure, it was by no means a massive or an overwhelmingly most populous part of the country, but because of the extreme decentralization of the Lithuanian state (as you said, each constituent duchy had its own laws and stuff like that), its importance was disproportionately higher because it belonged directly to the Grand Duke, rather than a vassal duke or a viceroy. It committed much more troops and taxes to the state per capita (in the Battle of Grunwald, ethnic Lithuanian banners composed nearly half of the Grand Duchy's army, despite Lithuania Propria only having 20-25 percent of the population).
As such, any wannabe Grand Dukes absolutely had to pay attention to the interests of the nobility and governors of Lithuania Propria, and having an Orthodox Muscovite take control would stand directly against their interests. Barring a much earlier centralization of Lithuania, and much wider than what Vytautas did during his reign, I can't see Vasily taking the throne without at least a large civil war.
Being baptised after already taking control is different from having an Orthodox noble inherit the country from the start. The only OTL example of an Orthodox person inheriting the throne of Lithuania was Vaišvilkas, who ruled for a total of two years in the 1260s before leaving, and Shvarn, who ended up killed within a year and possibly never stepped foot in Lithuania at all.
Outside of that, all Grand Dukes of Lithuania up to Vytautas inherited the throne while being pagan (often skipping Orthodox brothers in the process, such as Narimantas and Karijotas before Jaunutis, or Andrew, Demetrius and Vladimir before Jogaila). Vytautas is a special case, because he never inherited the throne of Lithuania at all - he was appointed by Jogaila as his viceroy in Lithuania, bypassing the religion clause.
It is generally agreed nowadays that Vytautas never actually wished to give Samogitia away with the Treaty of Salynas - all he needed was to acquire Teutonic help in his 1399 attack on the Golden Horde as well as make sure they do not attack him while he's campaigning there (and they didn't - they instead attacked immediately after he failed), and then get it back. He recognized the danger of letting the Knights have an immediate border with Lithuania Propria as well as to connect their holdings in Prussia and Livonia - especially since not long after acquiring Samogitia, the Knights began to attack his capital directly, doing so as early as 1402, a mere four years after the Treaty of Salynas.
And sure, if Lithuania shifted eastward after his death, that would justify caring a bit less about Samogitia - but that's a whole 30 years between Salynas and Vytautas's death during which Vytautas could simply retake that territory. After all, he was as opportunistic as a man could get.
The problem, though, is that Jogaila's killing of Kęstutis and near killing of Vytautas was an exception rather than the rule - generally, Lithuanian grand dukes preferred to keep even their worst rivals alive and instead subjugate them. Švitrigaila, who plotted against Vytautas for a good two decades, eventually became one of his allies; many of the dukes who fought against Jogaila when he first took over the throne ended up fighting alongside his viceroy in the Battle of Vorskla, so on and so forth.
In fact, Jogaila's actions were viewed very negatively in Lithuania as far as we can tell - Vytautas and others used them as propaganda against him.