WI : Constantinople withstands the Ottomans in 1453

Most at the time thought Constantinople had a good chance of resisting, and to a point it did quite well, until the walls near the Blachernae fell, and became an opening.

So, assuming that the Byzantines are able to reinforce that wall enough that it withstands the bombardment (Or dig enough of a trench behind it that it is dangerous to attempt to use the gap), and the Kerkoporta is kept shut. How long could the Byzantines have continued to resist the assaults?

More importantly, what the political consequences of Mehmed II essentially failing? Not only has he had to get his father to fight the Battle of Varna - now he's failed to take Constantinople with a significantly larger force. If the casualties are low, he may be branded a coward, if they are high, he may be branded a butcher. My understanding was that Constantinople was how Mehmed was going to consolidate his rule - failing to do that sounds like it could lead to disaster.

Are there any other consequences? Are the Christians under Ottoman rule going to be impressed enough to consider changing loyalties? Could there be rebellions/civil war? Another crusade? An assassination attempt? (A successful one?)
 
If mehmed dies, succession war for the ottomans. byzantines, venice and friends grab some clay.

If not, Constantinople fell a few year after.
 
Well maybe the Ottomans have a succession crisis, which provides breathing space for the Ottomans, maybe rejuvenates some interest in the West helping them, but Constantinople can't last much longer. The Empire isn't even a pale shadow of its former self, and there's no power looking to give them a free ride.

At best they might end up a vassal state of Venice which could be used to try and push back Ottoman power in the Med.
 
If mehmed dies, succession war for the ottomans. byzantines, venice and friends grab some clay.

If not, Constantinople fell a few year after.

Well maybe the Ottomans have a succession crisis, which provides breathing space for the Ottomans, maybe rejuvenates some interest in the West helping them, but Constantinople can't last much longer. The Empire isn't even a pale shadow of its former self, and there's no power looking to give them a free ride.

At best they might end up a vassal state of Venice which could be used to try and push back Ottoman power in the Med.

Eeesh, that is pretty dismal. Surely the prestige of a victory, under rather dire odds would be enough to encourage more support?

Regarding the "grabbing of clay", if the Ottomans are fighting themselves, could the Byzantines (with help from Genoa perhaps?) attempt to capture Rumelihisari and Anadoluhisari? Their garrisons don't seem that large, and their capture could certainly give the Empire a new lease of life via total control of the Bosphorus. Given that 4000 out of 10000 troops were lost in our Battle of Constantinople, I think it is fair to say that they may be able to gather a force of about 4000 to take each fortress. Not much in the grant scheme of things, and ideally sneaking in on the sly would be better, but I don't expect that particular clay to be impossible. As soon as we have a Byzantine Empire with control of the Bosporus, there is a new major source of income. It isn't as good as having the Dardanelles as well, but lets have baby steps here.

It seems obvious that the Byzantines could only really hope to hold them long term if the Ottomans really went to pieces, so how could the Byzantines help that happen? My first instinct is a last-ditch attempt to take control of the Dardanelles as well, giving them the ability to control easy passage from Europe to Anatolia, but I have no idea what taking it would entail. Again, having them gives the Byzantines more money, but it is precarious without additional aid.

Interestingly, if we assume an assassination or a death in the battle, there is only one heir at this point - Beyazid. However, he is 6, so I imagine the real conflict is between the Viziers. Some notable ones at this point were Candari Pasha and Zagan Pasha, who were both rivals involved with the battle for Constantinople, and Mahmud Pasha. Could they or any generals move to abandon a 6 year-old boy?

What other powers could try and move in on an unstable Ottoman Empire? Serbia under the Brancovic and Hungary under Hunyadi could all move into exploit the situation. The Karamanids in Anatolia. Hilariously, possibly Trezbizond (although they seem unlikely to succeed considering their track record IOTL).

Assuming even a fraction of that and the possibility of a Crusade, could the Byzantines gain control over the European side of the Sea of Marmara and the Straits?
 
Byzantium at this point in time has no independent foreign policy and effectively nil economic or military ability. It is somewhat akin to an independent Crimean republic prior to Russian annexation- a state that can only hope to prosper as a puppet, at best. Genoa at this point is little better, TBH, post-Chioggia Genoa entered a steep and largely permanent decline and is in no position to contest Venetian expansionism.

Venice and Hungary are the greatest beneficiaries of a 14th or 15th century Ottoman collapse; Byzantium, if she survives, will survive as a client state to one or both of these powers, and probably morph into a proto-Greek state (OTL Greece plus Thrace, maybe a bit of Asia minor). Venice will at minimum take Gallipoli and Thessalonika (they owned the city briefly in 1430), Bulgaria will become independent, Byzantium will get the scraps. I doubt they will be allowed to have all of the straits, the Venetians are too powerful and too involved for that, but they could snag the other side of the Bosporus and the rest of Thrace quite easily. My gut reaction is that they serve as a pro-Venetian buffer against Hungarian-aligned Bulgaria.


The Karamanids and Ak Qoyunlu will probably partition Anatolia between them; the latter could become another Ilkhanate (or even Safavid) Persian state in the absence of the Ottoman juggernaut.
 

trajen777

Banned
The Ottomans were ready to give up if the final assault had not succeeded. and actually the falling of the wall was not the reason the city fell. The Byz had left a sally gate unlocked in one of the towers and a lucky Ottoman found it. They acceded to the tower top and waved a flag. Coupled with this was the Genose commander being wounded and his being carried from the wall panicked the defenders. I wrote a TL on this couple years ago on this you can look up. Anyway i think u would have had a civil war amongst the ottomans form this. I think the best solution would be a merger of the Balkans at this time. The Byz city had only 50,000 or so people there at this time.
 
Byzantium at this point in time has no independent foreign policy and effectively nil economic or military ability. It is somewhat akin to an independent Crimean republic prior to Russian annexation- a state that can only hope to prosper as a puppet, at best. Genoa at this point is little better, TBH, post-Chioggia Genoa entered a steep and largely permanent decline and is in no position to contest Venetian expansionism.

That isn't entirely fair. Not only did Constantine XI have the ability to rebuild the Hexamilion, and repair the Theodosian Walls, but defended it with an army smaller than needed. If it can survive this final assault (at least according to @trajen777 ) then it can at the very least attempt a foreign policy. Can he afford to be cautious? No. Caution at this point is the death of the ERE. He needs to be able to pull a coup of sorts - if the wake of a victory in 1453, combined with the death of Mehmed II can't create the opening nothing can.

Venice and Hungary are the greatest beneficiaries of a 14th or 15th century Ottoman collapse; Byzantium, if she survives, will survive as a client state to one or both of these powers, and probably morph into a proto-Greek state (OTL Greece plus Thrace, maybe a bit of Asia minor). Venice will at minimum take Gallipoli and Thessalonika (they owned the city briefly in 1430), Bulgaria will become independent, Byzantium will get the scraps. I doubt they will be allowed to have all of the straits, the Venetians are too powerful and too involved for that, but they could snag the other side of the Bosporus and the rest of Thrace quite easily. My gut reaction is that they serve as a pro-Venetian buffer against Hungarian-aligned Bulgaria.

Venice only owned Thessalonika because the Byzantines gave it to them. It doesn't guarantee their success. I agree that Bulgaria will become independent again, and the Byzantines aren't going to be able to gain anything in the north (or the east for that matter.) They can only gain in three places (If anywhere in a grand gamble) - The Marmara, the Black Sea, and S.Greece.

Venice may pressure them to open up, but they're more interested in control over trade than the territory. Why risk war with the Ottomans (who may yet recover as far as Venice knows).

The Karamanids and Ak Qoyunlu will probably partition Anatolia between them; the latter could become another Ilkhanate (or even Safavid) Persian state in the absence of the Ottoman juggernaut.

Ak Qoyunlu may be a danger to Anatolia, but that is where both Karaman and (perversely) the Byzantines have a hand. The Byzantines may not be able to conquer, but they hold Orhan Celebi. A child King, civil war, invasion - Sehzade Orhan Celebi is the perfect man to release at the right time. A timely release could be effective at restoring the remnants of an Ottoman state after civil war and invasion, a ruler of the right dynasty and the right age is enticing.
 
That isn't entirely fair. Not only did Constantine XI have the ability to rebuild the Hexamilion, and repair the Theodosian Walls, but defended it with an army smaller than needed. If it can survive this final assault (at least according to @trajen777 ) then it can at the very least attempt a foreign policy. Can he afford to be cautious? No. Caution at this point is the death of the ERE. He needs to be able to pull a coup of sorts - if the wake of a victory in 1453, combined with the death of Mehmed II can't create the opening nothing can.



Venice only owned Thessalonika because the Byzantines gave it to them. It doesn't guarantee their success. I agree that Bulgaria will become independent again, and the Byzantines aren't going to be able to gain anything in the north (or the east for that matter.) They can only gain in three places (If anywhere in a grand gamble) - The Marmara, the Black Sea, and S.Greece.

Venice may pressure them to open up, but they're more interested in control over trade than the territory. Why risk war with the Ottomans (who may yet recover as far as Venice knows).
"Do not forget your guns, which are the best argument for the rights of kings."

If Venice wants Thessalonika then Venice will get Thessalonika, no matter what the "Emperor" in Constantinople wants or claims. Athens too, as at least according to Wiki Venice wanted to annex them.

Byzantium can't seize control of the straits without tacit Venetian approval, and they are unlikely to give such without territorial concessions, at the very least they will want an outpost on the Sea of Marmara, and quite probably in Greece as well.

Ak Qoyunlu may be a danger to Anatolia, but that is where both Karaman and (perversely) the Byzantines have a hand. The Byzantines may not be able to conquer, but they hold Orhan Celebi. A child King, civil war, invasion - Sehzade Orhan Celebi is the perfect man to release at the right time. A timely release could be effective at restoring the remnants of an Ottoman state after civil war and invasion, a ruler of the right dynasty and the right age is enticing.

The Byzantines have zero power projection in even Asia minor at this point in time, let alone in eastern Anatolia. Hell Trebizond is stronger than they are and they spent the period being a pawn in various Turkish lords' hands.

I would remind the thread that the Ottomans endured a terrible civil war in the wake of the Timurids. They fragmented in Anatolia but lost basically nothing in the Balkans (save protectorates over Serbia, Albania, Wallachia and the like), and that within twenty years they were back and stronger than ever. One defeat isn't magically going to erase the realities on the ground and the reality is that the ERE is a walking corpse.
 
While it is very, very unlikely that the ERE could recover at this point, I do not think it is entirely impossible, especially if the Ottomans collapse or are severely weakened as a result like some have already suggested is a real possibility. They could certainly assert control over much more of the area surrounding Constantinople itself and perhaps much of Thrace depending on how bad the Ottoman collapse/civil war is.

The ideal situation would be that they receive support from other Christian nations and Ottoman attention is diverted by civil war and attacks on their Anatolian holdings. The empire is as I've read not completely powerless at this time, more that it appears so in comparison to the Ottomans. Certainly attacks or uprisings by the Bulgarians and the Serbians, or even an attack by Poland-Lithuania (though they had failed just the decade before so perhaps it would have to come from, or at least be led by another power) would draw enough military attention away that they could take control of much of Northern Greece for themselves. If I am remembering right, even forgetting the troops in Constantinople itself, there were some forces in the Peloponnese that could be of use in that respect.

They certainly would not be able to launch a complete restoration, the money and economy just isn't there, and even enough of one to get their feet back under them would be a feat of military and diplomatic skill even in the context of complete Ottoman collapse and with foreign aid, as the underlying issues that led to the collapse in the first place are still there. But it is not impossible and may even give a smart Emperor the chance to make much needed reforms, if only due to the relative lack of internal rivals. I suppose that the best outcome possible would be the first steps of a much longer and incremental restoration.

Another thought I just had right before posting this is the possibility of a union with Trebizond. Not sure how feasible this would be at the time, but it would certainly help given a competent enough ruler. Or perhaps an outright takeover by the Komnenos in Trebizond of the remains of the Empire. It would certainly fit the almost tradition of usurpation of the Imperial throne, and if they do unite with Trebizond, that is a valuable city known for its trade with the far east, some extra manpower and if I remember correctly silver mines that would certainly be a massive help. Assuming they could hold it of course.

Like everything with this scenario, possible, but unlikely except in very specific circumstances.
 
"Do not forget your guns, which are the best argument for the rights of kings."

If Venice wants Thessalonika then Venice will get Thessalonika, no matter what the "Emperor" in Constantinople wants or claims. Athens too, as at least according to Wiki Venice wanted to annex them.

You misunderstand me. I'm not saying that Venice is unable. I'm saying that it didn't conquer it, nor for that matter, hold it against the Ottomans. Whilst I acknowledge that, and agree, that they are powerful, they aren't the only player involved in a potential Ottoman collapse, nor do they get things by waving a magic wand. If they chose to go against the Ottomans, even splintered, they'd have to oppose Ottoman fleets (of varying sizes), for whom a victory against Venice only raises their legitimacy. Venice is best positioned to intervene when the various factions have fought and sunk parts of each others fleets. If they do so at all. They didn't 50 years earlier during the Interregnum then.

Byzantium can't seize control of the straits without tacit Venetian approval, and they are unlikely to give such without territorial concessions, at the very least they will want an outpost on the Sea of Marmara, and quite probably in Greece as well.

Considering that Venice had already sent ships, and in April had sent a fleet (That was too late to participate), it suggests that they'd rather have the Emperor than the Sultan. Add in the (small) Byzantine fleet, the Genoese and Venetian ship already there - and the oncoming fleet from Venice - it genuinely looks to me that both Venice and Genoa would rather support the Romans. You may be right that the Romans may have to agree to ensure Venice has an outpost in the Sea of Marmara - it may even be Marmara itself. An alternative might be that Venice simply accepts lower tolls for their ships than the Ottomans were charging.

The Byzantines have zero power projection in even Asia minor at this point in time, let alone in eastern Anatolia. Hell Trebizond is stronger than they are and they spent the period being a pawn in various Turkish lords' hands.

Again, you misunderstand me - Karaman is an obvious present force that will try and prevent Ak Qoyunlu, but under the right circumstances (preferably one involving rivals bashing each other and pissing off the Turks and Janissaries), the Byzantines releasing Orhan Celebi provides an adult, with allies in Constantinople (which is better than no ally), of the right dynasty - and has as good a chance as any to unite the Ottomans around him, especially with the patchwork Byzantine-Italian coalition ostensibly behind him. At which point any Turks not under the Karamanese in Anatolia have someone who they can realistically rally behind - and fight back against Ak Qoyunlu and Karaman.

I would remind the thread that the Ottomans endured a terrible civil war in the wake of the Timurids. They fragmented in Anatolia but lost basically nothing in the Balkans (save protectorates over Serbia, Albania, Wallachia and the like), and that within twenty years they were back and stronger than ever. One defeat isn't magically going to erase the realities on the ground and the reality is that the ERE is a walking corpse.

Nobody is saying that the realities on the ground are being erased - but the situation is different. A child Sultan rather than a few heirs of differing age - nearby enemies waiting to pounce on a civil war, and a city - the aforementioned Walking Corpse, that despite being outnumbered 10:1 defeated them.

And the evidence shows that whilst the Byzantines were a minor state compared to the Ottomans (Hence being made vassals), they were not a walking corpse. Under Constantine they had for the first time in decades actually partaken in campaigns that united near all of the Morea, then Athens and Thebes - ok, not a grand reconquest, but it certainly shows they had the ability to fight and conquer smaller enemies.
 
How, without any kind of navy to speak of?

Its own small one, combined with the rather short journey to cross the Bosporus makes at least one fort each to capture - if the Venetian fleet comes, there you go.

While it is very, very unlikely that the ERE could recover at this point, I do not think it is entirely impossible, especially if the Ottomans collapse or are severely weakened as a result like some have already suggested is a real possibility. They could certainly assert control over much more of the area surrounding Constantinople itself and perhaps much of Thrace depending on how bad the Ottoman collapse/civil war is.

The ideal situation would be that they receive support from other Christian nations and Ottoman attention is diverted by civil war and attacks on their Anatolian holdings. The empire is as I've read not completely powerless at this time, more that it appears so in comparison to the Ottomans. Certainly attacks or uprisings by the Bulgarians and the Serbians, or even an attack by Poland-Lithuania (though they had failed just the decade before so perhaps it would have to come from, or at least be led by another power) would draw enough military attention away that they could take control of much of Northern Greece for themselves. If I am remembering right, even forgetting the troops in Constantinople itself, there were some forces in the Peloponnese that could be of use in that respect.

They certainly would not be able to launch a complete restoration, the money and economy just isn't there, and even enough of one to get their feet back under them would be a feat of military and diplomatic skill even in the context of complete Ottoman collapse and with foreign aid, as the underlying issues that led to the collapse in the first place are still there. But it is not impossible and may even give a smart Emperor the chance to make much needed reforms, if only due to the relative lack of internal rivals. I suppose that the best outcome possible would be the first steps of a much longer and incremental restoration.

Another thought I just had right before posting this is the possibility of a union with Trebizond. Not sure how feasible this would be at the time, but it would certainly help given a competent enough ruler. Or perhaps an outright takeover by the Komnenos in Trebizond of the remains of the Empire. It would certainly fit the almost tradition of usurpation of the Imperial throne, and if they do unite with Trebizond, that is a valuable city known for its trade with the far east, some extra manpower and if I remember correctly silver mines that would certainly be a massive help. Assuming they could hold it of course.

Like everything with this scenario, possible, but unlikely except in very specific circumstances.

Thanks for the comments!

Whilst the Trebizond idea is entertaining - I think that conflict was sorted when Constantinople recognised Trebizond as Emperors in the East. Trebizond is better served setting itself up better in north-eastern Anatolia as best it can, rather than trying to project force across the Black Sea.

I just wanted to check what you were calling the underlying issues - the lack of manpower, fiscal shortage, and loss of control over trade? I'd like to think that the last two could be negated by capturing the Bosporus forts and the Dardanelles. Manpower is certainly a problem that isn't going to go away, and almost certainly relies on the goodwill of people outside of the Empire itself - volunteers, defectors, refugees, etc.

Won't lie, this has been stewing all day, I might have to try hashing out a TL on this, without trying to make it too fanciful.
 
Whilst the Trebizond idea is entertaining - I think that conflict was sorted when Constantinople recognised Trebizond as Emperors in the East. Trebizond is better served setting itself up better in north-eastern Anatolia as best it can, rather than trying to project force across the Black Sea.

I just wanted to check what you were calling the underlying issues - the lack of manpower, fiscal shortage, and loss of control over trade? I'd like to think that the last two could be negated by capturing the Bosporus forts and the Dardanelles. Manpower is certainly a problem that isn't going to go away, and almost certainly relies on the goodwill of people outside of the Empire itself - volunteers, defectors, refugees, etc.

Won't lie, this has been stewing all day, I might have to try hashing out a TL on this, without trying to make it too fanciful.

I'll admit the Trebizond idea is a little far-fetched and would likely have to wait until later when the empire isn't in quite so immediate danger of collapse.

The manpower issue though is what would concern me the most though. Money and trade are certainly helpful, but the foreign aid is a temporary measure at best and outright dangerous in the worst possible case. What is to stop those foreign armies from trying to take over themselves? No matter how much land and population the empire manages to retake it will take at least a few years to make any significant use of a larger population, as administration has to be set up in the retaken areas and any men you recruit have to be trained, equipped and organized into units before sending them to fight or even garrison a fort. The manpower issue is especially concerning in the long run as reliance on mercenaries and foreign troops is part of what left them in this situation to begin with.

The biggest fear I would have is that the Ottomans or Karaman manage to end their conflicts to soon and attack the Empire before they've had a chance to consolidate whatever gains they make, leaving them right back where they started, albeit with one more cool story and victory under their belt.

Come to think of it, this is all before we even consider the political infighting that characterized the Empire for centuries before the collapse. Though that would be a much more long term issue to solve.

Edit: I would definitely read that TL if you did end up posting it though.
 
I'll admit the Trebizond idea is a little far-fetched and would likely have to wait until later when the empire isn't in quite so immediate danger of collapse.

The manpower issue though is what would concern me the most though. Money and trade are certainly helpful, but the foreign aid is a temporary measure at best and outright dangerous in the worst possible case. What is to stop those foreign armies from trying to take over themselves? No matter how much land and population the empire manages to retake it will take at least a few years to make any significant use of a larger population, as administration has to be set up in the retaken areas and any men you recruit have to be trained, equipped and organized into units before sending them to fight or even garrison a fort. The manpower issue is especially concerning in the long run as reliance on mercenaries and foreign troops is part of what left them in this situation to begin with.

The biggest fear I would have is that the Ottomans or Karaman manage to end their conflicts to soon and attack the Empire before they've had a chance to consolidate whatever gains they make, leaving them right back where they started, albeit with one more cool story and victory under their belt.

Come to think of it, this is all before we even consider the political infighting that characterized the Empire for centuries before the collapse. Though that would be a much more long term issue to solve.

Edit: I would definitely read that TL if you did end up posting it though.

These concerns are all entirely true - I won't post spoilers, but I think that we have an opportunity here. So much would have to ride on a balance of prestige and chaos.
 

Red Orm

Banned
Its own small one, combined with the rather short journey to cross the Bosporus makes at least one fort each to capture - if the Venetian fleet comes, there you go.

I meant, how will that fleet control the Bosporus? It's small enough that there will be so much smuggling going on, and any halfway decently sized seaside count/emir could wipe the floor with them if they tried to collect some kind of strait or harbor dues.
 
But why would the Venetian/Genovese let them do that?

Promises of access, low or no tariffs? Protection for Venetian and Genovese ships from Ottomans coming from the Black Sea.

Or not having a say in the matter as one can be approached by land, and they are all technically in this war together. Neither needs large forces that the Byzantines themselves can't gamble with to take.
 
Promises of access, low or no tariffs? Protection for Venetian and Genovese ships from Ottomans coming from the Black Sea.

Or not having a say in the matter as one can be approached by land, and they are all technically in this war together. Neither needs large forces that the Byzantines themselves can't gamble with to take.
Again, why would Venice/Genoa not seize these outposts for themselves?

"Friendships end, but power projection is forever." It's the same reason that Britain obstinately clings to Gibraltar even to the present day.
The Italian Republics are major players in the Mediterranean and Venice would under any realistic 15th century Ottoman-screw be doing much of the heavy lifting in conjunction with Hungary. They aren't going to do so for free.
 
Last edited:
Again, why would Venice/Genoa not seize these outposts for themselves?

"Friendships end, but power projection is forever." It's the same reason that Britain obstinately clings to Gibraltar even to the present day.
The Italian Republics are major players in the Mediterranean and Venice would under any realistic 15th century Ottoman-screw be doing much of the heavy lifting in conjunction with Hungary. They aren't going to do so for free.
One possibility is that if both Venice and Genoa are fighting in this war on the same side, they might allow the Byzantines to keep these forts if only because neither wants to let the other have control of access to the Black Sea. Genoa and Venice, particularly at this time, were rarely on friendly terms with one another and would likely prefer relatively neutral Byzantine control of the Straights to their direct rival.
 
Top