Let's play

[Nikolai]

Let's play a game of alternate history shall we? Let us think a Roman Catholic crypto-Byzantine Empire has reconquered much of Asia Minor and now finds itself in the early 17th century with roughly a third of it's population Muslim - and that proportion likely to increase, as the Ottomans continue their decline.

Assuming that the Empire is as tolerant as can reasonably be plausible for the standards of the time, what sort of goverment and system would develop?

[lord of the mark]

1. Can i make a suggestion - that if we're going to do whatifs, we make a point of fully specifying the POD (point of departure) We dont have to be as anal about it as the folks at Soc.history.what-if, but really, the origin matters.


I assume your POD is that in the last years of OTL byzantium, the negotiations for Byz to go RC in exchange for assistance work out. Thats probably difficult, since the westerners, IIUC, werent really ready to offer meaningful help, and the rivalries between Genoa and Venice meant there was alwasy somebody who thought the Byz E wasnt worth keeping for commercial reasons, and none of the Italians were all that concerned about religious matters. But lets handwave that away - lets say, that, through some odd set of events, the Venetian upper class is dominated by folks who REALLY do care whether the Greeks in Constantinople say Filoque (or whatever) and will offer a large fleet and lots of ducats if they make the switch. So enough force goes to Constantinople to harm, delay, Ottoman military activities, and perhaps lead to a lucky death of a key general, and to a failure of nerve on the Ottoman part, and maybe to internal troubles on the Ottoman part. Siege ends, for the moment.

What happens next? Youve now got a Byz empire, thats nominally RC, under Venetian dominance, and small.

1. Will the ordinary guy on the street really follow RC? Will there be a breakaways church of "old believers"?

2. Does Venice even want them to expand back into Anatolia? That both risks a big loss, and OTOH, if its a win, could make the BE more independent. I would say that Venice tries to hold them back.

3. How easy would a reconquista be anyway? I suspect going deep into Asia Minor will be VERY difficult. Theres always Trebizond, though

4. What happens to the Ottoman vassals in the Balkans, Serbia and Bulgaria? Depends how bad things get for the Ottomans in Asia Minor, I suspect. Genoa, say, while possibly considering trying to rival Venice in BE, may have a better shot at an alliance with Serbia or Bulgaria, and using that as a balance to BE.

5. How does the conversion of the BE effect the rest of the Orthodox world, especially Russia? I doubt they will follow suit, but this has to be demoralizing, and lessen the sense of Russia as "heir" of BE.

[VetLegion]

It didn't take long until you got terrorized by a shwi-er, eh Nikolai

I'd say converting Orthodox to Catolics is nigh impossible and would cause riots if serious attempts were made. The differences were long standing and serious.

The problem with Byzantines (they called themselves Romans) is that their population and military recruitment base is in Asia Minor, if they lose it they are no longer an empire, but just a trading city. If it becomes impossible for Ottomans to conquer Constantinople, they may tolerate it in exchange for annual payements of gold, and focus on Persia and Russia for conquests. Not impossible.

To be more precise and elaborate, we'd need a fixed single POD, as lotm said.

[Blaupanzer]

An interesting factor is that the Byzantines spoke Greek and depended on the population of Smyrna and the surrounding areas for recruitment. These people all regarded themselves as Greeks and would be driven out in real life. If the Byzantines (who called themselves Roman, had been able to recover (or hold) that recruiting ground, the Government that emerged would probably not be substantially different than the one that had ruled for 1000 years. The elites might be nominally RC, but the masses would remain mostly Greek Orthodox. The effect on the Balkans would be significant but difficult to predict.

Curiousity: When did the Russian Orthodox church separate from the Greek and why? The answer clearly affects the course of this alt hist.

[lord of the mark]

If the Patriarch in Constantinople says "we now believe X, and all priests are to say X" doesnt that pretty much make it so, at least for anyone whos staying inside the established church? Only alternatives are go along, riot, or secede to make a different church. Lots of ordinary folks will keep going to the established church and not pay attention to the theological nuance - i mean thats what happened in England under the Henrican church, Russia when the O church was reformed, etc. (I dont know what happened in Scandinavia when the national churches went Lutheran - I assume Nikolai can tell us?)

OTOH Constantinople DID have a more theologically sensitive population, I suppose.

[Nikolai]

The church in Denmark-Norway did make some troubles IIRC, but I think(this is not my area of expertice) it went pretty well. As for a POD, I don't know what would be the most plausible date, but I thought of some time around the destruction of OTL Byzantium, when the empire was more or less dead, and so (I guess) easier to reform. That would require some kind of crusadesque warmongering from the outside I guess. Alternatively we could go out from a successful Latin Empire, but I don't remember exactly when that empire was compared to the OE, so I'm not sure if that would work?

Sorry for being so n00b on this, I'm very interested in history but all my knowledge is from what I've read on my own really, I have no formal education except the little the state teach us...

[Nikolai]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
(I dont know what happened in Scandinavia when the national churches went Lutheran - I assume Nikolai can tell us?)

the little English wikipedia gives:

The Norwegians were Catholics until the Danish king Christian III of Denmark ordered Denmark to convert to Lutheranism in 1536 and as Norway was then ruled by Denmark, the Norwegians converted as well. The Danish Church Ordnance was introduced in 1537 and a Norwegian Church Council officially adopted Lutheranism in 1539. Monasteries were dissolved and church property confiscated with the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Norway established and funded by the state.

Bishops still adhering to Catholicism were deposed with Archbishop Olav of Nidaros fleeing the country in 1537 and another bishop dying in prison in 1542. Catholicism held on remote parts of Norway for another couple of decades. Many pastors were replaced with Danes and Norwegian clergy being trained at the University of Copenhagen as Norway didn't have a university. The Danish translation of the bible was used as were Danish catechisms and hymns. The use of Danish in religious ceremonies had a strong influence on the development of the Norwegian language.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Nikolai
The church in Denmark-Norway did make some troubles IIRC, but I think(this is not my area of expertice) it went pretty well. As for a POD, I don't know what would be the most plausible date, but I thought of some time around the destruction of OTL Byzantium, when the empire was more or less dead, and so (I guess) easier to reform. That would require some kind of crusadesque warmongering from the outside I guess. Alternatively we could go out from a successful Latin Empire, but I don't remember exactly when that empire was compared to the OE, so I'm not sure if that would work?

That was around 1250. Another interesting POD, but thats so early, its really going to be impossible to say whats happened in the 17th c. Too many butterfly and knock on effects, etc.

Sorry for being so n00b on this, I'm very interested in history but all my knowledge is from what I've read on my own really, I have no formal education except the little the state teach us...

Are you interested in some of the nuances of discussing historical what ifs

[Blaupanzer]

What-Ifs do have rules as to what alternatives are being sought, over what period, etc. LOTM is probably more up on this than I am. But most alternate histories tend to diverge for a time then converge to the known timeline with some specific differences caused by the alternatives. A classic is what-if the Greeks lost to the Persians. Would democratic and republican forms of government have been lost? Would the Macedonians had no part in history or in Hellenizing the eastern Mediterranean and Persia? How would the emergence of Rome and Carthage been affected? But at some point the fabulizers return to the world of the fallen western empire (whomever) and the surviving eastern empire (also whomever). That's just an example, not a thread hijack -- this topic has been addressed both by professional historians and by the sci-fi/fantasy types several times. The proposed idea relating to the Roman Catholic crypto-Byzantine Empire which has reconquered much of Asia Minor and now finds itself in the early 17th century has not. But the others are right, we need to lay out where we started to go alternate and where we rejoin the timeline, if at all. The description actually sounds like the end-point. Envision a pompous professor speaking:: "Harumph, so that students is why the Ottomans faced the crisis in the mid-Seventeenth Century about how to deal with the still extant "Roman Empire."

[lord of the mark]

Im not sure what you mean by return to the Original time line.

If you mean no further "interventions" in the conventional what if, that happens immediately. You get one point of departure, on what day, that sets the butterflies flapping, and thats it.

If you mean when does the ATL start to look like OTL again, I dont think it necessarly ever has to. SOME PODs are such as to be equilibrated (in SOME respects) - making country X stronger has a tendency to lead to balancing coalitions against country X, for example. Or making more people (given food production constraints) just leads to hunger, and brings things back to OTL. But some good PODS can really set things rolling so that the ATL diverges completely from OTL. Usually serious discussion of such a TL has to end well before the present, because it diverges so far, it becomes impossible to intelligently say anymore what might have been, even speculatively.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Blaupanzer
But most alternate histories tend to diverge for a time then converge to the known timeline with some specific differences caused by the alternatives. A classic is what-if the Greeks lost to the Persians. Would democratic and republican forms of government have been lost? Would the Macedonians had no part in history or in Hellenizing the eastern Mediterranean and Persia? How would the emergence of Rome and Carthage been affected? But at some point the fabulizers return to the world of the fallen western empire (whomever) and the surviving eastern empire (also whomever).

Oh, i see what youre saying. Somebody starts a what if with greeks losing, and they STILL get a fallen western empire. Well, thats just cause the fabulizers are stupid. Its like when Turtledove has the Union lose to two wars to the CSA, has the Mexican empire survive, has Britain and France allied in the 1880s (as the were NOT in OTL) and yet has the World War breakout right on time in August 1914. As if the diverging events from 1862 on havent butterflied away Princip, and the events that immediately followed. Turtledove just hadnt thought it through, or didnt really care.

[VetLegion]

I agree with lotm, standard what-if scenarios have only one Point Of Divergence and that's it. They do not usually rejoin Our Time Line, at least the quality ones.

[MMC]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Turtledove just hadnt thought it through, or didnt really care.

I'd put it down to him just not caring. It's too hard to say he hasn't thought it through
But aliens landing during WW2 is the utlimate classic from him.

[Straybow]

If in the XIV. the Ottomans fail to consolidate, grow, and displace the remnant Seljuk kingdoms then the East remains divided and unable to press into Ionia and the Balkans.

Now when Portugal opens the southern route to the orient and the New World is discovered Venice and Constantinople find a common cause in defeating the Turks and Mamluks to make their trade routes more profitable.

But this would not result in an RC crypto-Byzantine. I don't see how to pull that off.

[Dr Strangelove]

I'm not even sure what the proposition is. Are you suggesting that in this alternate history, when Constantinopole is about to fall that the west offers to help repel the Ottomans in exchange for the Patriarch swearing fealty to the Roman Pope?