WI : Constantine, Despot of the Morea Post-1453

One of the offers made during the Fall of Constantinople was the offer for Constantine to relocate to the Morea as Governor.

What if, instead of that offer (which was refused), the Ottomans offered to allow Constantine to be Despot of the Morea, their vassal in perpetuity, and an incredible quantity of gold to compensate the Emperor, and he accepted that offer, taking control of the Despotate, backed by an army of freshly recruited and armed Romans (yay coin) - and taking a number of monuments and artefacts with them (such as the Statue of Justinian, etc), and bringing some stability to the Morea (and avoiding the later Albanian revolt in the area).

Lets assume the Ottomans never retract this state of vassalage, and respect the rule of the Despots of the Morea - how does this situation evolve? What is the overall strategy for such a realm for survival and prosperity? What cultural changes might we see?

----

For me, the idea for a strategy would be the idea of being loyal to the Ottomans - moving into Attica if a civil war takes place to 'enforce the peace', to if a war requires those areas to be stripped of troops (defacto taking command, but totally loyal like), and trying supplant Venice in trade.

With the Ottoman navy protecting them, the Romans can trade with Egypt more easily, and it is more palatable to trade with the Romans rather than the Ottomans - either making them a good partner for Venice, or someone who can undermine them.
 
my God, 5 years have passed since I started this thread:
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/constantine-accepts-mehmeds-offer.200655/

I feel old

Aye. Old thread is old.

I'll admit I'm handwaving part of your issue, by stating that the vassal state is kept. The method of survival, relevant, but I'm going with the "They are well behaved, and useful", as an approach, but I'd rather discuss methods of survival, rather than the ability to do so.

The thread does allude to an interaction between the Morea and Italy - trade and cultural exchange - would you like to expand on that?
 
One of the offers made during the Fall of Constantinople was the offer for Constantine to relocate to the Morea as Governor.

What if, instead of that offer (which was refused), the Ottomans offered to allow Constantine to be Despot of the Morea, their vassal in perpetuity, and an incredible quantity of gold to compensate the Emperor, and he accepted that offer, taking control of the Despotate, backed by an army of freshly recruited and armed Romans (yay coin) - and taking a number of monuments and artefacts with them (such as the Statue of Justinian, etc), and bringing some stability to the Morea (and avoiding the later Albanian revolt in the area).

Lets assume the Ottomans never retract this state of vassalage, and respect the rule of the Despots of the Morea - how does this situation evolve? What is the overall strategy for such a realm for survival and prosperity? What cultural changes might we see?

----

For me, the idea for a strategy would be the idea of being loyal to the Ottomans - moving into Attica if a civil war takes place to 'enforce the peace', to if a war requires those areas to be stripped of troops (defacto taking command, but totally loyal like), and trying supplant Venice in trade.

With the Ottoman navy protecting them, the Romans can trade with Egypt more easily, and it is more palatable to trade with the Romans rather than the Ottomans - either making them a good partner for Venice, or someone who can undermine them.


Any attempt of an alliance with the Ottoman rivals should be avoided. This means even during the Great Turkish War. And I am not sure how the trade with Egypt will go as the Ottomans and Mamluks are rivals in the Area.

Now the WI scenario:
Morea will need its time to develop and reach the level of Italy. As a vassal they will have to fight together with the Ottomans. And if of course it will be with a lot of warfare in the 15th century. If the Byzantine refugees leave for Morea instead of Italy after the fall of Constantinople it will boost up the the region as it did IOTL with (North) Italy. By the end of the 16th century Morea will have its golden age. To have a good relationship with the sultan the despot sends a gift every now weds one of its daughters to the prince/sultan. Despot is now in good position to influence the Ottoman Sultan.

Morea like this could be a boost for an independent Greece in the 19th century.
 
Any attempt of an alliance with the Ottoman rivals should be avoided. This means even during the Great Turkish War. And I am not sure how the trade with Egypt will go as the Ottomans and Mamluks are rivals in the Area.

Alliance with Rivals? Is this a strategic concern? I'd agree, especially in the early days. Friendly relationships might be useful though.

Now the WI scenario:
Morea will need its time to develop and reach the level of Italy. As a vassal they will have to fight together with the Ottomans. And if of course it will be with a lot of warfare in the 15th century. If the Byzantine refugees leave for Morea instead of Italy after the fall of Constantinople it will boost up the the region as it did IOTL with (North) Italy. By the end of the 16th century Morea will have its golden age. To have a good relationship with the sultan the despot sends a gift every now weds one of its daughters to the prince/sultan. Despot is now in good position to influence the Ottoman Sultan.

I imagine quite a few Romans might go to the Despotate, simply to avoid the Jizya. Although, the idea of forming an army-within-an-army whilst serving the Ottomans could be interesting - experimenting with advanced tactics and techniques.

I also wonder whether this Morea, fragile its state of power is might open its doors to any Jews from Spain - and perhaps leech many of them from the Ottomans too.

Morea like this could be a boost for an independent Greece in the 19th century.

Who says it'd consider itself and independent Greece? A surviving Morea might assert its independence, and then claim the mantle of the Roman Empire - a sleeping Empire that rises out of the ashes could be an interesting twist.
 
Any attempt of an alliance with the Ottoman rivals should be avoided. This means even during the Great Turkish War. And I am not sure how the trade with Egypt will go as the Ottomans and Mamluks are rivals in the Area.

Now the WI scenario:
Morea will need its time to develop and reach the level of Italy. As a vassal they will have to fight together with the Ottomans. And if of course it will be with a lot of warfare in the 15th century. If the Byzantine refugees leave for Morea instead of Italy after the fall of Constantinople it will boost up the the region as it did IOTL with (North) Italy. By the end of the 16th century Morea will have its golden age. To have a good relationship with the sultan the despot sends a gift every now weds one of its daughters to the prince/sultan. Despot is now in good position to influence the Ottoman Sultan.

Morea like this could be a boost for an independent Greece in the 19th century.
I'm seriously doubtful about the impact of Byzantine refugees on the development of Italy.By all means,Constantinople by 1400 was already a backwater city ,with a population of around 50,000 by the time of the final siege.The city was so depopulated that people could farm within it's walls.It was by no means an intellectual center.
 
Last edited:
Played with an idea for something like this. Constantine and Thomas relocate and ostensibly convert to Islam while quietly remaining loyal to the Orthodox Church. They allow for Jewish resettlement after Spain exiles them. Over the next two centuries they serve faithfully and expand their power base, even marrying an Ottoman daughter (from a Ukrainian mother) into the bloodline. By 1700 they are ready to move for independence and take most of the Ottoman European holdings alomg with the Aegean coast of Turkey with them.
 
Last edited:

B-29_Bomber

Banned
I'm seriously doubtful about the impact of Byzantine refugees on the development of Italy.By all means,Constantinople by 1400 was already a backwater city ,with a population of around 50,000 by the time of the final siege.The city was so depopulated that people could farm within it's walls.It was by no means an intellectual center.

50,000 is still on par with other cities in the West. And sure, Constantinople is hurting, but that's not the only place Byzantine refugees will be coming from.
 
50,000 is still on par with other cities in the West. And sure, Constantinople is hurting, but that's not the only place Byzantine refugees will be coming from.
And few cities like that are great intellectual centers.I seriously doubt that these East Roman refugees carry things the west already doesn't know.I'd imagine that events like the Crusades,especially the Fourth one would have greater impact in bringing knowledge to the West.It also requires a peaceful,stable and prosperous environment to establish a great intellectual center. None of the ERE successor states after 1204 were really that.The Nicaea-led successor state in particular was constantly bankrupt after it re-took Constantinople.If anything,the Palaeologian ERE was showing signs of great regression,with it going increasingly feudal.Establishment of intellectual centers goes hand in hand with economic opportunity and sponsorship.The ERE after the 1400s simply doesn't have that.

In my opinion,the Byzantine refugees spurring the Renaissance theory is just an imagination of scholars.
 
Last edited:

B-29_Bomber

Banned
And few cities like that are great intellectual centers.I seriously doubt that these East Roman refugees carry things the west already doesn't know.I'd imagine that events like the Crusades,especially the Fourth one would have greater impact in bringing knowledge to the West.It also requires a peaceful,stable and prosperous environment to establish a great intellectual center. None of the ERE successor states after 1204 were really that.The Nicaea-led successor state in particular was constantly bankrupt after it re-took Constantinople.If anything,the Palaeologian ERE was showing signs of great regression,with it going increasingly feudal.

In my opinion,the Byzantine refugees spurring the Renaissance theory is just an imagination of scholars.

Ever heard of the Palaeologan Renaissance
 
Ever heard of the Palaeologan Renaissance
Yes,and I think it's significance is just overrated,and that whatever boost it brought to Italy won't have the same effect on Morea.Whatever enhancement it gave to Italy and the Renaissance,it happened precisely because Italy was already wealthy and a great intellectual center,which Morea clearly was not.
 
Last edited:
Played with an idea for something like this. Constantine and Thomas relocate and ostensibly convert to Islam while quietly remaining loyal to the Ottomans. They allow for Jewish resettlement after Spain exiles them. Over the next two centuries they serve faithfully and expand their power base, even marrying an Ottoman daughter (from a Ukrainian mother) into the bloodline. By 1700 they are ready to move for independence and take much of the Ottoman European holdings with them.

HERESY! Conversion to Islam! Nevah! Although, the idea of having someone claim to be the Roman Emperor AND the Caliph is an interesting one. It'd be interesting if the scenario had a syncretic Christianity/Islam.

I'm seriously doubtful about the impact of Byzantine refugees on the development of Italy.By all means,Constantinople by 1400 was already a backwater city ,with a population of around 50,000 by the time of the final siege.The city was so depopulated that people could farm within it's walls.It was by no means an intellectual center.

50,000 is still on par with other cities in the West. And sure, Constantinople is hurting, but that's not the only place Byzantine refugees will be coming from.

And few cities like that are great intellectual centers.I seriously doubt that these East Roman refugees carry things the west already doesn't know.I'd imagine that events like the Crusades,especially the Fourth one would have greater impact in bringing knowledge to the West.It also requires a peaceful,stable and prosperous environment to establish a great intellectual center. None of the ERE successor states after 1204 were really that.The Nicaea-led successor state in particular was constantly bankrupt after it re-took Constantinople.If anything,the Palaeologian ERE was showing signs of great regression,with it going increasingly feudal.Establishment of intellectual centers goes hand in hand with economic opportunity and sponsorship.The ERE after the 1400s simply doesn't have that.

In my opinion,the Byzantine refugees spurring the Renaissance theory is just an imagination of scholars.

Yes,and I think it's significance is just overrated,and that whatever boost it brought to Italy won't have the same effect on Morea.Whatever enhancement it gave to Italy and the Renaissance,it happened precisely because Italy was already wealthy and a great intellectual center,which Morea clearly was not.

One point of agreement and another of disagreement.

1) I agree that it won't magically make the Morea a micro-Italy. Mystras was developing as a cultural hub, by any measure - but it isn't on par with all of Italy. Perhaps equivalent to one of the larger duchies.

2) I disagree about the impact on Italy. It is more about what texts they brought with them, texts that Italy had largely been ignoring - including some of the writing of Pleithon. Plus, despite your expectations - Constantinople was still a prestigious city (to those who weren't already there), with a pretty large 'middle class' for a city of its size, due to the Italian presence in the city already.
 
Top