|
|
Post by MarshalBraginsky on Aug 16, 2017 3:27:39 GMT
"You venture to call out Ferdinand a wise ruler. He who has impoverished his own country and enriched mine!"
The quote above was told by Sultan Bayezid II when he learned of the Spanish and Portuguese expulsions of the Jews and Muslims from the Iberian Peninsula. His words proved prophetic, as the expelled Jewish and Muslim refugees contributed a lot to the development of the Ottoman Empire, particularly in art, culture, and possibly finances. The Jews living inside Ottoman territory flourished and they had a bit of a cultural revival. It was possible that Jewish merchants were also pivotal in improving the Ottoman economy.
Now supposed that Spain and Portugal chose not to expel the Jews, but only Muslims. (I don't mean to sound Islamophobic, BTW) With the Jews being spared from expulsion, how would the Ottoman Empire be affected by a lack of presence of Jewish refugees? For one thing, would Ottoman commerce be affected by the absence of the Jews? Would the Ottomans have to resort to using expelled Muslim merchant refugees or rely more on Greek or Armenian merchants?
|
|
|
|
Post by steve59 on Aug 16, 2017 19:23:16 GMT
"You venture to call out Ferdinand a wise ruler. He who has impoverished his own country and enriched mine!" The quote above was told by Sultan Bayezid II when he learned of the Spanish and Portuguese expulsions of the Jews and Muslims from the Iberian Peninsula. His words proved prophetic, as the expelled Jewish and Muslim refugees contributed a lot to the development of the Ottoman Empire, particularly in art, culture, and possibly finances. The Jews living inside Ottoman territory flourished and they had a bit of a cultural revival. It was possible that Jewish merchants were also pivotal in improving the Ottoman economy. Now supposed that Spain and Portugal chose not to expel the Jews, but only Muslims. (I don't mean to sound Islamophobic, BTW) With the Jews being spared from expulsion, how would the Ottoman Empire be affected by a lack of presence of Jewish refugees? For one thing, would Ottoman commerce be affected by the absence of the Jews? Would the Ottomans have to resort to using expelled Muslim merchant refugees or rely more on Greek or Armenian merchants? Presuming that Spain could avoid falling prey to religious intolerance at a later stage and hence just delaying matters it will have an effect. Not sure how much as I don't know how important 'native' Jews inside the empire were or whether their treatment was affected by the arrival of the western Jews. As you say there are other Christian groups such as the Greeks and Armenians who can play a larger role but whether that would mean more tolerance of them and their interests? There would definitely be one downside for the Ottomans in that Spain would be stronger with the extra people, abilities and tolerance in general. Also such a status might mean that any Jewish communities in place like N Africa might be supportive of Spanish moves to control that region. Possibly you might even see the Barbary pirates suppressed and Spanish rule secured in western N Africa. Which if it proved stable would make a huge impact on war in the Med in the early modern peiod. Could end up with the western Med becoming largely a Spanish lake as they ruled much of southern Italy during this period as well while the lack of Barbary pirates ravaging Christian trade and communities would boost the stability and income of the region. Note this is possibly the maximum that might be achieved although it could also butterfly through to greater successes elsewhere in Spain. |
|
|
|
Post by MarshalBraginsky on Aug 17, 2017 2:13:06 GMT
Yikes. If that were to happen and Spain essentially recreates the Roman Empire, but with just southern Italy and northwestern Africa, would a Spanish Mediterranean Empire actually kill the need to build a colonial empire in the Americas and in the Philippines? That would literally be a huge game changer. It may mean that Portugal takes the New World by its lonesome, or even the French, English and Dutch would have a much bigger chance of colonizing the Americas. French, Dutch or English Brazil, Argentina, Central America and Mexico to one under Portuguese rule. It might also mean that the Ottomans might have to show more tolerance towards Greeks and Armenians in their empire, or what's more likely is that there may be an Ottoman equivalent of Emperor Akbar of the Mughal Empire where he just proclaims religious tolerance for Christians and Muslims. Unfortunately for the rest of Europe, it would mean that the Sultan would win more Orthodox Christians over to the Ottoman Turks, and with the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople essentially an Ottoman puppet, it might have a much more dangerous and negative effect on Catholic-Orthodox relations. It might also give the Catholic Church one good reason to increase their hatred of Orthodox Christians by calling them slaves and vassals of the heathen Muslim Turkish sultan. Even Muscovite Russia might either create its own Reformed Orthodox movement, or worse, become Uniates or Greek Catholics, or more likely, the Muscovite Russian state could even form an alliance with the Ottomans and Safavids to counter Catholic Europe. Wow, that would be a crapsack world to live in. Basically Catholic-Jewish alliance vs Orthodox-Sunni-Shia alliance.  Would a bigger Spanish presence in North Africa also result in potential expansion into sub-Saharan Africa though? That would be interesting to see: a Spanish Empire that is partially African as well, and devoid of any New World riches. However, if it's only Muslim refugees fleeing from Catholic Spain, their expertise in the latest European technologies would be far more limited. Would the Protestant Reformation still happen? It may, or it could be killed in the crib because the fear of having Protestantism arise would result in the Catholic Church labeling the Protestants as agents of the Ottoman Sultan and by proxy, the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople. It wasn't farfetched that the early Protestant reformers sought a rapprochement with the Orthodox Church, so in this case it would be a reverse Uniatism, writ large. |
|
|
|
Post by steve59 on Aug 17, 2017 18:57:33 GMT
church Yikes. If that were to happen and Spain essentially recreates the Roman Empire, but with just southern Italy and northwestern Africa, would a Spanish Mediterranean Empire actually kill the need to build a colonial empire in the Americas and in the Philippines? That would literally be a huge game changer. It may mean that Portugal takes the New World by its lonesome, or even the French, English and Dutch would have a much bigger chance of colonizing the Americas. French, Dutch or English Brazil, Argentina, Central America and Mexico to one under Portuguese rule. Possibly although I would expect between its strength and geographical position Spain would still be likely to have a significant presence in the Americas. However they may well not be dominant as OTL. Also who gets Mexico and then the Inca empire would be the big initial gainers, because of their mineral wealth. One point would be if Spain still takes over Portugal as OTL, in which case its likely to gain additional colonial territories. Not sure how likely this is however as it seemed to have relied on a dwindling of the Portuguese royal line and then a disasterous defeat for its army including the death of its king and much of the nobility on 'crusade' in Morocco. Portugal is probably more likely, because of its OTL expansion to go east although geography still makes some presence in Brazil a high possibility. A Spain with relatively few American possessions but inheriting the Portuguses east would mean both a lot of wealth and involvement in the eastern spice trade and conflict with the Ottomans and other groups in the Indian Ocean. Spain being more powerful than Portugal, especially possibly in this scenario but without the same conflicts in the Americas might keep the Portiuguese possessions in the Indian Ocean and the east Indies. A related factor is what happens with the Netherlands. Will butterflies prevent the OTL empire of Charles V? If it doesn't does Spain still inherit it or it ends up in Austrian hands, or even as a 3rd Hapsburg nation. If it ends up with Spain does a more politically moderate and possibly economically more successful Spain avoid the revolution of OTL? [Since I'm assuming continued religious tolerance, at least of Jews, would likely rule out a Philip II type monarch. Also if it does stay Spanish and loyal and Spain also dominates the western Med so greatly how powerful is France likely to be? [Probably a lot less than OTL]. I doubt the Shia, presuming they take over in Persia, would be in such an alliance. Their more likely to be allied with Spain against the Ottomans. [Just as OTL and possibly TTL France often worked with the Ottomans against the Hapsburgs]. Do agree that a more tolerant, at least towards Orthodox Christians, will probably be even more successful in Orthodox areas. They might be more bitterly opposed in Catholic regions like Hungary and Croatia and the like - although again butterflies could mean the Reformation is drastically changed but I suspect something along that line should still occur. In two minds about Russia. An Orthodox friendly Ottoman empire might be tempted to Moscow but also the Russian Orthodox establishment was very much committed to Moscow as the 3rd Roman. As such they might still end up bitterly hostile to the Ottomans. Especially since the Muslim rumps of the Golden Horde are still likely to be raiding Russian territory. Although until the late 17thC at the least Moscow is likely to be a relatively minor player. Plus since its also going to have conflicts with the Polish and Swedish states [or whoever dominates the Baltic region] it could end up being very much an independent player. I suspect that a Spain victorious along the N African coastline won't be greatly involved in the trans-Sarahian trade as that would probably be dominated by hostile inland Muslim tribes. Also their likely to see the oceanic trade as more profitable and practical. They may, if they end up with Carribean colonies, get involved with slave trading from W Africa as with other western nations. This is likely to occur if their late-coming to the American colonial contest, but those do end up as some of the most profitable areas once sugar plantations become economically important. In terms of the Reformation its very likely that something like that would happen. The Catholic church was deeply afflicted by corruption and bigotry in this period so likely to see some opposition to it. Again this might be crushed earlier, or influenced by a more moderate Spain, be absorbed into a reform process that stays within the Catholic church. Possibly even Luther ending up as a reforming pope?  Alternatively it could end up similar to OTL with bitter conflict but with a more moderate Spain, busy converting N Africa, there could be a lot of butterflies. With Spain also controlling much of Italy you could see rivarily between it and the Papacy, which fears growing Spanish power, so you might even end up with Spain going Protestant. Given the huge butterflies there are plenty of things that could go massively different. |
|
|
|
Post by MarshalBraginsky on Aug 18, 2017 6:33:20 GMT
I could see that if Spain and Portugal united, then the focus of their empire would most likely be in Africa and south Asia, with only a few colonies in the Americas. The Deep South of OTL would be a good colonial region for Spanish and Portuguese settlement. In addition, the Netherlands might actually be passed down to Austrian control if the OTL empire of Charles V is butterflied away, thus stopping the possibility of the Dutch revolt from happening, although other forms of incidents can still lead to such a rebellion occurring. North Africa, bits of Central Africa and southern India might be their main focus of colonial and mercantile settlement, although it wouldn't be farfetched to have a Spanish/Portuguese presence in what is now western Australia.
Having more Orthodox Christians siding with the Turkish sultan than with the Catholic West would be a huge game changer, especially if Wallachia and Moldavia shifted gears and had rulers who preferred Ottoman overlordship to Hungarian or Polish magnates who would pick on them. In addition, the Ecumenical Patriarchate would also claim leadership over all of the Orthodox Christians living within Ottoman Rumelia, although the long standing resentment towards the Ecumenical Patriarch from among the Bulgarian Orthodox Christians might be an issue. You might see a similar reformation movement within the Orthodox Church that rejects the Ecumenical Patriarchate and seek an audience with the Patriarch of Moscow.
Going to the subject of Russia, I suspect that the Old Believer Rites might be the dominant rite within the Russian Orthodox Church, and there might not be reforms. Alternatively though, there was also the Non-Possessor movement which condemned the Orthodox clergy's ownership of property, so I honestly believe that the Orthodox Church as a whole might be split along ideological lines. The Ecumenical Patriarchate would be the main backers of the Possessor movement (which promoted the idea of ecclesiastical ownership of property) while the Russian Church might side with the Non-Possessors. In some cases, Russia might alternate between alliance with the Ottomans and alliance with Persia. I've discussed this a long time ago with another ex-CF.net member about the potential effects of a Muscovite-Safavid alliance, which might also include closer relationship between Russia and Persia.
I could imagine Spain becoming the dominant champion of Catholicism, although the Protestant Reformation might go in a different direction. Heck, we might see an early version of the Uniate movement, though it would be more like Philip Melanchthon's attempt to unite his Protestant movement with Orthodoxy. Alternatively, it might also be France who becomes the dominant champion of the Catholic Church while Spain as you might suggest, go Protestant, or in my view, go Anglican.
Now, how would the ever growing splits within Christianity affect the Turks? The Sultan, being the master statesman, depending on the ruler in question, might support the Orthodox or Protestants.
|
|
|
|
Post by steve59 on Aug 18, 2017 18:53:20 GMT
I think, if we assume that Spain maintains control of southern Italy and gains control of N Africa from say Tunis westwards, that baring other major conflicts it would probably be the main enemy in the west of the Sultan so he would [if competent] seek to boost its enemies. This would doubly be the case if Spain absorbed Portugal and inherited its interests in the Indian Ocean and hence clashed with the Turks there. [Especially if butterflies prevented/delayed any Dutch revolt and hence their taking over of much of the Portuguese eastern empire].
Such enemies might well be France, if not too badly weakened in this scenario, or even whoever ends up in charge in Germany - which might still be an Hapsburg dyansty, especially if they still own the Netherlands, which would give them a position from which to threaten Spanish colonial trading possessions.
Interesting idea of the Spanish possibly making more success of their Florida colony and coming to control much of the OTL American south. If they manage to hold this then that means probably no single state dominating N America. Especially since the region further north could well be split among other powers.
Europe might end up split roughly as OTL but with different players in assorted roles. I suspect that the same drivers would probably mean the Europe develops industrialisation and becomes the dominant region of the world for a while.
|
|
|
|
Post by MarshalBraginsky on Aug 20, 2017 19:53:31 GMT
I think, if we assume that Spain maintains control of southern Italy and gains control of N Africa from say Tunis westwards, that baring other major conflicts it would probably be the main enemy in the west of the Sultan so he would [if competent] seek to boost its enemies. This would doubly be the case if Spain absorbed Portugal and inherited its interests in the Indian Ocean and hence clashed with the Turks there. [Especially if butterflies prevented/delayed any Dutch revolt and hence their taking over of much of the Portuguese eastern empire]. Such enemies might well be France, if not too badly weakened in this scenario, or even whoever ends up in charge in Germany - which might still be an Hapsburg dyansty, especially if they still own the Netherlands, which would give them a position from which to threaten Spanish colonial trading possessions. Interesting idea of the Spanish possibly making more success of their Florida colony and coming to control much of the OTL American south. If they manage to hold this then that means probably no single state dominating N America. Especially since the region further north could well be split among other powers. Europe might end up split roughly as OTL but with different players in assorted roles. I suspect that the same drivers would probably mean the Europe develops industrialisation and becomes the dominant region of the world for a while. I think that in this case the Ottomans might not be in a position to help the various North African Muslim states that are allied to it. Although it might also expand on its European and Egyptian holdings, especially if the Ottomans are aiming to conquer all of Hungary. In any case, there could be a chance that the Hungarians might end up suffering the fate of Serbia: getting defeated in battle, followed by various Hungarian lords becoming Turkish vassals and then turning Hungary into an Ottoman protectorate before becoming annexed, although that might be a tall order. The Ottomans would simply partition Hungary into several components: an ethnically Hungarian majority, a Transylvanian entity, a Croatian entity that becomes the next Pashalik and a Slovak entity that might either become another Ottoman vassal state or it joins the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
Although I would also ask this: would there be even less Jews living in Jersualem if the Spaniards didn't expel the Jews from Spain? Would Jews living in the Levant be encouraged to move into Spain upon hearing that the Spanish king is treating the Jews kindly.
|
|
|
|
Post by steve59 on Aug 20, 2017 22:46:59 GMT
I think, if we assume that Spain maintains control of southern Italy and gains control of N Africa from say Tunis westwards, that baring other major conflicts it would probably be the main enemy in the west of the Sultan so he would [if competent] seek to boost its enemies. This would doubly be the case if Spain absorbed Portugal and inherited its interests in the Indian Ocean and hence clashed with the Turks there. [Especially if butterflies prevented/delayed any Dutch revolt and hence their taking over of much of the Portuguese eastern empire]. Such enemies might well be France, if not too badly weakened in this scenario, or even whoever ends up in charge in Germany - which might still be an Hapsburg dyansty, especially if they still own the Netherlands, which would give them a position from which to threaten Spanish colonial trading possessions. Interesting idea of the Spanish possibly making more success of their Florida colony and coming to control much of the OTL American south. If they manage to hold this then that means probably no single state dominating N America. Especially since the region further north could well be split among other powers. Europe might end up split roughly as OTL but with different players in assorted roles. I suspect that the same drivers would probably mean the Europe develops industrialisation and becomes the dominant region of the world for a while. I think that in this case the Ottomans might not be in a position to help the various North African Muslim states that are allied to it. Although it might also expand on its European and Egyptian holdings, especially if the Ottomans are aiming to conquer all of Hungary. In any case, there could be a chance that the Hungarians might end up suffering the fate of Serbia: getting defeated in battle, followed by various Hungarian lords becoming Turkish vassals and then turning Hungary into an Ottoman protectorate before becoming annexed, although that might be a tall order. The Ottomans would simply partition Hungary into several components: an ethnically Hungarian majority, a Transylvanian entity, a Croatian entity that becomes the next Pashalik and a Slovak entity that might either become another Ottoman vassal state or it joins the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
Although I would also ask this: would there be even less Jews living in Jersualem if the Spaniards didn't expel the Jews from Spain? Would Jews living in the Levant be encouraged to move into Spain upon hearing that the Spanish king is treating the Jews kindly.
On this last point I doubt many Jews would move west unless the better treatment in Spain meant the Ottomans decided to mistrust them and as such started to persecute them. Apart from anything else moving half way across the Med would be expensive and diffcult, especially when your trying to move from one major power to its great enemy. Also given the level of communications at the time the odd rumour that things are better in Spain wouldn't mean a lot unless things got really bad where you are now. I think if the Ottomans lost the Barbary coast as it was called, it would strengthen the Christian powers in the Med and especially Spain a hell of a lot. Far less pirates from the region, or at least far less preying on Christian shipping. Probably now hitting the Ottoman trade. True it could well be costly to Spain conquering and the securing their hold on the region. OTL when they did capture cities, such as Tunis, for a while it was a burden economically because outside the immediate area of the city there were hostile groups raiding the Spanish. If however Spain manages to control the entire coastline, once the coastal region is secured and the population used to Spanish rule they would dominate at least the western Med and be a lot stronger in the eastern Med. The Ottomans are likely to be so pressurised that they probably won't be able to hold Ottoman Turkey for as long as they did OTL. Provided you don't get an alliance against Spanish power Venice might also be able to maintain its control of Crete and other island possessions in the east. Although their harsh rule made them bitterly unpopular with their Orthodox citizens. In this scenario I wouldn't even rule out Spain, provided its not too distracted elsewhere, seeking another crusade, or at least an attack on Egypt say. |
|
|
|
Post by MarshalBraginsky on Aug 21, 2017 0:04:38 GMT
That is true. If the Ottomans are pressured in the west, then they might be forced to move eastwards, but Persia is a tough nut to crack. I had this scenario where the Ottomans expand on their expedition to Aceh and actually create a vassal kingdom where the Acehnese ruler would theoretically be an Ottoman vassal, but with a similar status to that of the Crimean Khan. Perhaps in this scenario the Ottomans would have to realize that if they intend to survive the long conflict against the Christians, they would have to improve their naval technology. A Venetian alliance with the Turks could also prompt Spain to back whichever Italian statelet that has the most grudge against Venice to actually conquer them.
But with a larger Spanish population in North Africa, would they still have any colonists left to spare for the New World though?
|
|
|
|
Post by steve59 on Aug 21, 2017 19:49:44 GMT
That is true. If the Ottomans are pressured in the west, then they might be forced to move eastwards, but Persia is a tough nut to crack. I had this scenario where the Ottomans expand on their expedition to Aceh and actually create a vassal kingdom where the Acehnese ruler would theoretically be an Ottoman vassal, but with a similar status to that of the Crimean Khan. Perhaps in this scenario the Ottomans would have to realize that if they intend to survive the long conflict against the Christians, they would have to improve their naval technology. A Venetian alliance with the Turks could also prompt Spain to back whichever Italian statelet that has the most grudge against Venice to actually conquer them. But with a larger Spanish population in North Africa, would they still have any colonists left to spare for the New World though? I'm thinking that if Spain gets that strong then the Ottomans are going to be too busy to push east more powerfully than OTL and could see losses to Persian pressure in Mesopotamia and possibly eastern Anatolia. Especially with Spanish naval units rampaging across the Med and possibly disrupting their operations in the Indian Ocean as well if it inherits the Portiguese empire. Doubly so if Venice allies with Spain. If Venice fears Spain more it might form some sort of pact with the Turks but I suspect that could be fatal for them. Spanish rule in Naples, which I think we're assuming and the probably power of the Spanish fleet could mean Venice gets blockaded, at the straits of Otranto if not further north. Also presuming Genoa is still about its likely to ally against its traditional enemy. Plus of course Spain, depending on the situation in N Italy, might well be powerful enough to simply march an army north and at least deny Venice its land provinces. In the short term the activities in N Africa would restrict Spanish activity elsewhere. Including in terms of numbers of colonists. However if the Maghreb becomes secures, either through the people being converted to Catholics loyal to the dynasty or supplanted by settlers from Iberia, or some combination of this, then later on this gives a greater pool of resources, including population, to support Spanish colonisation in the Americas. The ideal path for Spain would be if this is largely completed by say ~1650 and Spain dominates the Med and the Indian Ocean. From this point if they gain few Caribbean islands then relatively small numbers of colonists and lots of slaves [unfortunately] could make for very wealthy colonies, further increasing their wealth and power. This is followed by setter colonies in areas along the north of the Gulf of Mexico and you could end up with a large settler population from say Texas to Florida, gradually spreading northerwards along the Atlantic coast and the rivers, especially the Mississippi. Even if industrialisation stared off in N Europe and Spain was initially left behind it could have such momentum that it keeps a large colony in N America, domination of the Med, or at least its western basin and a powerful position in the East Indies. Even if Britain say, ends up dominating India as OTL and possibly the western Indian Ocean. |
|
|
|
Post by MarshalBraginsky on Aug 22, 2017 5:28:07 GMT
Ironically enough, the Ottoman suspension of their expansion campaign might actually help them build long lasting foundations for a permanent, stable society. That is because the Ottoman system primarily relied on expansion and didn't actually take its time to refine its own system to make it work. Limiting its expansion might also allow the Ottomans to build its infrastructure in Anatolia and the rest of the Middle East.
I suspect that Spain might also try to back the separatists in the Ragusan Republic, but there is a possibility that the Ottomans might also simply march in and conquer those territories. Alternatively, Naples can also be the one to rule Ragusa, but there is also a possibility that the Neapolitans might use Ragusa as a springboard to conquer other parts of the Balkans, primarily Montenegro, Albania, Thessaly and Greece.
I could picture the Spanish North American colony to resemble the territories of the former CSA from OTL, though they wouldn't get far with how much they can colonize it. Though their settler colonies are not too big, they might become compact enough to survive long enough to be integrated into Spain proper. I can see Spain embracing pluricontinentalism in this case, with Spain's integrated territories being in North America, Africa and maybe bits of Australia. If Spain only gets the Caribbean colonies and southeast North America, then who gets Latin America if France doesn't also colonize it?
|
|
|
|
Post by steve59 on Aug 22, 2017 16:58:53 GMT
Ironically enough, the Ottoman suspension of their expansion campaign might actually help them build long lasting foundations for a permanent, stable society. That is because the Ottoman system primarily relied on expansion and didn't actually take its time to refine its own system to make it work. Limiting its expansion might also allow the Ottomans to build its infrastructure in Anatolia and the rest of the Middle East. I suspect that Spain might also try to back the separatists in the Ragusan Republic, but there is a possibility that the Ottomans might also simply march in and conquer those territories. Alternatively, Naples can also be the one to rule Ragusa, but there is also a possibility that the Neapolitans might use Ragusa as a springboard to conquer other parts of the Balkans, primarily Montenegro, Albania, Thessaly and Greece. I could picture the Spanish North American colony to resemble the territories of the former CSA from OTL, though they wouldn't get far with how much they can colonize it. Though their settler colonies are not too big, they might become compact enough to survive long enough to be integrated into Spain proper. I can see Spain embracing pluricontinentalism in this case, with Spain's integrated territories being in North America, Africa and maybe bits of Australia. If Spain only gets the Caribbean colonies and southeast North America, then who gets Latin America if France doesn't also colonize it? It could be if the Ottomans are forced to consider reform and moving from rampant expansionism earlier. They might concentrate on securing their positions in the Balkans and Anatolia/Syria. Which could make for a significant power that resists Russia's move southwards. I think the greater mistrust of Catholics by the Orthodox would limit success by any western power attacking south of Hungary. It would depend on the circumstances if neither Spain or Portugal gain significant amounts of OTL Latin America. England and France are obvious candicates. The Netherlands may not exist. Sweden or Denmark could be other possibilities. Also some German state if one is able to direct itself towards oceanic expansion. However if Spain isn't heavily involved in early American colonisation there are so many butterflies that just about anything can happen. |
|
|
|
Post by MarshalBraginsky on Aug 22, 2017 18:38:07 GMT
Ironically enough, the Ottoman suspension of their expansion campaign might actually help them build long lasting foundations for a permanent, stable society. That is because the Ottoman system primarily relied on expansion and didn't actually take its time to refine its own system to make it work. Limiting its expansion might also allow the Ottomans to build its infrastructure in Anatolia and the rest of the Middle East. I suspect that Spain might also try to back the separatists in the Ragusan Republic, but there is a possibility that the Ottomans might also simply march in and conquer those territories. Alternatively, Naples can also be the one to rule Ragusa, but there is also a possibility that the Neapolitans might use Ragusa as a springboard to conquer other parts of the Balkans, primarily Montenegro, Albania, Thessaly and Greece. I could picture the Spanish North American colony to resemble the territories of the former CSA from OTL, though they wouldn't get far with how much they can colonize it. Though their settler colonies are not too big, they might become compact enough to survive long enough to be integrated into Spain proper. I can see Spain embracing pluricontinentalism in this case, with Spain's integrated territories being in North America, Africa and maybe bits of Australia. If Spain only gets the Caribbean colonies and southeast North America, then who gets Latin America if France doesn't also colonize it? It could be if the Ottomans are forced to consider reform and moving from rampant expansionism earlier. They might concentrate on securing their positions in the Balkans and Anatolia/Syria. Which could make for a significant power that resists Russia's move southwards. I think the greater mistrust of Catholics by the Orthodox would limit success by any western power attacking south of Hungary. It would depend on the circumstances if neither Spain or Portugal gain significant amounts of OTL Latin America. England and France are obvious candicates. The Netherlands may not exist. Sweden or Denmark could be other possibilities. Also some German state if one is able to direct itself towards oceanic expansion. However if Spain isn't heavily involved in early American colonisation there are so many butterflies that just about anything can happen. France might be the better candidate to become the dominant power in North America, though England could also qualify as well. Alternatively, there might be a different entity that would exist in place of the Netherlands, but stretching from the North Sea and the English Channel to the Rhine River. I recall that there was a deviantart picture of the Royal Dominion of New Austria, which was basically a colony made by the Austrians. However, if France were to become the dominant power in Latin America, they would need to have a much better luck of discovering the Americas. Maybe the French would form a confederation of Mesoamerican native tribes opposed to the Aztecs, or they could even turn the Aztec empire into their protectorate, and they might do the same thing with the Incas. I don't see Denmark or Sweden getting that far with Latin America. They might colonize their old stomping grounds in North America. |
|
|
|
Post by steve59 on Aug 22, 2017 22:30:22 GMT
France is likely to have more resources and more royal involvement, although the latter is not necessarily a good thing. However if Spain is going ulbra in the Med what does that mean for France and how much it's trying to either expand into Italy or maintain its hold on Langdouc and Province? Plus if Spain and Austria remains friendly, even if the Burgundian inheritance goes to Austria rather than Spain France is very much between a rock and a hard place.
We basically need to avoid the Hapsburg's dominating west/central Europe totally else too much goes astray but what sort of position is France in if its virtually surrounded by a markedly more powerful Hapsburg bloc, even if that is also fighting the Turks, the German lords and probably other groups.
What I might be tempted to suggest is that France roughly takes Spain's OTL place, being 1st to conquer large areas in the Americans, including both big empire - or at least protectorise them, then possibly declines as other powers compete for territory. It will have the early big winners of the mineral wealth of Mexico and the Incas, which might help it resist the Hapsburg pincers, but that will incite jealously of other powers and it is less prominent in the 2nd wave, of sugar and other goods in the Caribbean islands.
That would possibly leave Britain to settle much of N America north of the Spainish lands. This would fit in with the original interest in the Grand Banks fisheries and spreading south from there.
Mind you so many things are going to change its pretty much certain we're restricted to guessing.
Steve
|
|
|
|
Post by MarshalBraginsky on Aug 23, 2017 3:36:53 GMT
France is likely to have more resources and more royal involvement, although the latter is not necessarily a good thing. However if Spain is going ulbra in the Med what does that mean for France and how much it's trying to either expand into Italy or maintain its hold on Langdouc and Province? Plus if Spain and Austria remains friendly, even if the Burgundian inheritance goes to Austria rather than Spain France is very much between a rock and a hard place. We basically need to avoid the Hapsburg's dominating west/central Europe totally else too much goes astray but what sort of position is France in if its virtually surrounded by a markedly more powerful Hapsburg bloc, even if that is also fighting the Turks, the German lords and probably other groups. What I might be tempted to suggest is that France roughly takes Spain's OTL place, being 1st to conquer large areas in the Americans, including both big empire - or at least protectorise them, then possibly declines as other powers compete for territory. It will have the early big winners of the mineral wealth of Mexico and the Incas, which might help it resist the Hapsburg pincers, but that will incite jealously of other powers and it is less prominent in the 2nd wave, of sugar and other goods in the Caribbean islands. That would possibly leave Britain to settle much of N America north of the Spainish lands. This would fit in with the original interest in the Grand Banks fisheries and spreading south from there. Mind you so many things are going to change its pretty much certain we're restricted to guessing. Steve The best way to avoid a huge Hapsburg wank in this case would be to have a unified Iberian Union with the House of Aviz becoming the dominant dynasty. Without the Spanish inheritance, the Hapsburgs would have to centralize their empire to include the Burgundian shares. At least, for France's sakes, it would be able to alleviate itself from having to surround itself with hostile enemies, although I also wonder if the Austrian Hapsburgs would also push for a Hapsburg prince or princess to rule one of the Italian states as well. A Hapsburg Austria and a Hapsburg southern Italy. How can Austria get Naples, Sicily and the rest of southern Italy though? I think that it was either going to be Spain becoming dominant in North and West Africa, or it will be dominant in the New World. I don't see Spain dominating both areas: not much manpower to control them. |
|
|
|
Post by steve59 on Aug 23, 2017 19:37:44 GMT
France is likely to have more resources and more royal involvement, although the latter is not necessarily a good thing. However if Spain is going ulbra in the Med what does that mean for France and how much it's trying to either expand into Italy or maintain its hold on Langdouc and Province? Plus if Spain and Austria remains friendly, even if the Burgundian inheritance goes to Austria rather than Spain France is very much between a rock and a hard place. We basically need to avoid the Hapsburg's dominating west/central Europe totally else too much goes astray but what sort of position is France in if its virtually surrounded by a markedly more powerful Hapsburg bloc, even if that is also fighting the Turks, the German lords and probably other groups. What I might be tempted to suggest is that France roughly takes Spain's OTL place, being 1st to conquer large areas in the Americans, including both big empire - or at least protectorise them, then possibly declines as other powers compete for territory. It will have the early big winners of the mineral wealth of Mexico and the Incas, which might help it resist the Hapsburg pincers, but that will incite jealously of other powers and it is less prominent in the 2nd wave, of sugar and other goods in the Caribbean islands. That would possibly leave Britain to settle much of N America north of the Spainish lands. This would fit in with the original interest in the Grand Banks fisheries and spreading south from there. Mind you so many things are going to change its pretty much certain we're restricted to guessing. Steve The best way to avoid a huge Hapsburg wank in this case would be to have a unified Iberian Union with the House of Aviz becoming the dominant dynasty. Without the Spanish inheritance, the Hapsburgs would have to centralize their empire to include the Burgundian shares. At least, for France's sakes, it would be able to alleviate itself from having to surround itself with hostile enemies, although I also wonder if the Austrian Hapsburgs would also push for a Hapsburg prince or princess to rule one of the Italian states as well. A Hapsburg Austria and a Hapsburg southern Italy. How can Austria get Naples, Sicily and the rest of southern Italy though? I think that it was either going to be Spain becoming dominant in North and West Africa, or it will be dominant in the New World. I don't see Spain dominating both areas: not much manpower to control them. Good point with a Aviz dynasty. That would avoid the Hapsburg's getting so powerful and would also mean Spain kept its interest more in the Med and the route around Africa, when that was discovered. Also it means that France wouldn't be so threatened, although I suspect its still likely that the Aviz and Hapsburgs would probably end up frequent allies against the Ottomans and French. However see the Hapsburgs fighting the French in N Italy and Burgundy, with possibly some help in the former, while Spain does the naval war against the Turks and possibly helps the Hapsburgs in Hungary in some way. If Spain does dominate N Africa that would reduce their potential in the Americas early on. However once secured, especially if they also kept S Italy and dominated the Med, reducing the devastation of Muslim pirates, this would give them potential to be a major player later on as they have more security at home and a larger resource base. Coupled with cash from their eastern possessions, as they might well maintain control of the spice islands - since more powerful than Portugal in defence while the Dutch may not be a player in TTI. This would fit in with them playing a major role in N America and providing the settlers for that to become a major power there. |
|
|
|
Post by MarshalBraginsky on Aug 24, 2017 6:17:22 GMT
With regards to the Ottomans, I can see improvements in relations between Orthodox Christians and Sunni Muslims living within its territories. However, Russia might also have its own improvement of relations with Safavid Persia and they might also have its own reform movement that would resemble both the Nikonian and Non-Possessor reforms. For their church reforms, they might also benefit from earlier contact with the Georgian and Armenian churches. Hopefully the Russian Church would eventually have influences from both the Chalcedonian and Non-Chalcedonian traces. Or there would be a completely different kind of Uniate Church where both Orthodox Christians and Catholics would not pledge their loyalty to both the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople and the Pope.
If France does end up conquering or vassalizing the Inca and Aztec Empire, we might see a totally different development of Latin America that is not only Francophone, but I suspect that they might rule with a lighter touch, although certain tribes might also give them a hard time, leading to any worst kind of massacres that may occur. If that were to happen, would France be the one to discover the Philippines though? Or would it be colonized by Japan or China instead?
|
|
|
|
Post by steve59 on Aug 24, 2017 20:16:29 GMT
With regards to the Ottomans, I can see improvements in relations between Orthodox Christians and Sunni Muslims living within its territories. However, Russia might also have its own improvement of relations with Safavid Persia and they might also have its own reform movement that would resemble both the Nikonian and Non-Possessor reforms. For their church reforms, they might also benefit from earlier contact with the Georgian and Armenian churches. Hopefully the Russian Church would eventually have influences from both the Chalcedonian and Non-Chalcedonian traces. Or there would be a completely different kind of Uniate Church where both Orthodox Christians and Catholics would not pledge their loyalty to both the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople and the Pope. If France does end up conquering or vassalizing the Inca and Aztec Empire, we might see a totally different development of Latin America that is not only Francophone, but I suspect that they might rule with a lighter touch, although certain tribes might also give them a hard time, leading to any worst kind of massacres that may occur. If that were to happen, would France be the one to discover the Philippines though? Or would it be colonized by Japan or China instead? On that last point I suspect that France would be the 1st nation to explore the Pacific, if it dominates most of OTL Latin America. Although Spain moving north from the East Indies might well get to the Philippines before the French. Believe the Ming had already turned inwards from their great days of exploration and had been only really interested in superficial overlordship rather than real control of areas they discovered. They were replaced by the Manchu who seem to have had little interest in overseas development. Japan seems to have been more outward looking so if it avoids the turn inwards of OTL could be a potential player in E Asia several centuries earlier than OTL. Don't really know enough about the details of the religious interactions in Russia and other areas but what you say sounds quite possible. With links with Shia Persia and the older Orthodox regions fairly quiet under Ottoman control you could see the Russian church drift away from the Constaninople Patriarchate. |
|
|
|
Post by MarshalBraginsky on Aug 25, 2017 5:56:05 GMT
With regards to the Ottomans, I can see improvements in relations between Orthodox Christians and Sunni Muslims living within its territories. However, Russia might also have its own improvement of relations with Safavid Persia and they might also have its own reform movement that would resemble both the Nikonian and Non-Possessor reforms. For their church reforms, they might also benefit from earlier contact with the Georgian and Armenian churches. Hopefully the Russian Church would eventually have influences from both the Chalcedonian and Non-Chalcedonian traces. Or there would be a completely different kind of Uniate Church where both Orthodox Christians and Catholics would not pledge their loyalty to both the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople and the Pope. If France does end up conquering or vassalizing the Inca and Aztec Empire, we might see a totally different development of Latin America that is not only Francophone, but I suspect that they might rule with a lighter touch, although certain tribes might also give them a hard time, leading to any worst kind of massacres that may occur. If that were to happen, would France be the one to discover the Philippines though? Or would it be colonized by Japan or China instead? On that last point I suspect that France would be the 1st nation to explore the Pacific, if it dominates most of OTL Latin America. Although Spain moving north from the East Indies might well get to the Philippines before the French. Believe the Ming had already turned inwards from their great days of exploration and had been only really interested in superficial overlordship rather than real control of areas they discovered. They were replaced by the Manchu who seem to have had little interest in overseas development. Japan seems to have been more outward looking so if it avoids the turn inwards of OTL could be a potential player in E Asia several centuries earlier than OTL. Don't really know enough about the details of the religious interactions in Russia and other areas but what you say sounds quite possible. With links with Shia Persia and the older Orthodox regions fairly quiet under Ottoman control you could see the Russian church drift away from the Constaninople Patriarchate. It has IOTL, with regards to the Russian church. That is why there is the Patriarchate of Moscow, who is Kirill right now. Although the Ming had turned inwards, it didn't stop Chinese merchants from immigrating to SE Asia. From what I heard, the various Chinese dynasties didn't place emphasis on business and mercantile trade, and so Chinese merchants often established overseas communities, often in SE Asia. A different Chinese dynasty could take the place of the Qing, though the remnants of the Northern Yuan might also have a shot at reconquering China. Japan could still be a viable candidate to colonize the OTL Philippine islands, although it would be fascinating to see it become some sort of Wokou dominated state (basically a colony created by Japanese pirates, with a Wokou daimyo establishing his rule in the islands). I had an idea with regards to a different Spanish colonization of the Americas: Spanish America may resemble something like this instead of the OTL territories of the Viceroyalty of New Spain:  The dark green on the map indicates the OTL proposal for a huge confederation of slave states called the Golden Circle. Perhaps a similar scenario where the Spanish would import more slaves to work in agricultural fields and mines may also result in a huge confederation of encomiendas that would literally build a huge economy primarily on slave labor. The Spaniards can still explore the Pacific, they would be focused so much on consolidating control of the Golden Circle areas that they might not be able to explore California, leaving that to either the French or the Russians. I might also think that the Russian Church would be so desperate to move away from the Constantinople Patriarchate ITTL that they might entertain with the idea of establishing connections with the Oriental Orthodox Churches that are either under Ottoman or Persian rule, or a closer relationship with the Georgian Orthodox Church that decides to move away from the Patriarchate of Constantinople to the Patriarchate of Moscow and All of Rus'. Alternatively, the Russian Orthodox Church would also form a pact with the Armenian Apostolic Church to the point where the practices of the Russian Church would be a mixture of Greek-Byzantine, Slavonic and Armenian. There is a slight possibility that Spain-Portugal union might also lose Brazil to France, mainly because the dual union would focus so much on the eastern trade routes that they'd also forget about Brazil as well. |
|
|
|
Post by steve59 on Aug 25, 2017 21:46:41 GMT
Is that Spanish domination of Mexico and the isthmus pretty much from the start or coming from a later conquest? If the former then its diffcult not to see them taking at least Peru-Bolivia and N Chile as its far easier reaching them, especially the Inca heartland, from the isthmus rather than around Cape Horn. Also I doubt that even the mega Spain we're assuming here would be able to totally monopolise all the Caribbean islands as, presuming the sugar plantation culture develops their far too wealthy. I could see a powerful anti-Spanish coalition resulting to prevent that, especially if they already have the upper hand in the east Indies as well.
If Spain is a late comer with a few Caribbean Islands, then as N Africa is secured and become a strong asset rather than a burden, they also start settling the Texas-Florida region and expand outwards from there. Possibly as far north as you suggest before a rival {Britain?] blocks further expansion and also southwards against a France established in central and southern America, but now declining. Their able to drive the French from Mexico and the isthmus and get some areas on the north coast of S America, plus probably clearing much of the Caribbean Islands but I suspect not all of them.
Spain is still likely to be No.1 or No.2 in western Europe, especially if it has key areas in Africa and the Indian Ocean, including most of the East Indies. Even if say another power becomes dominant in India. However if it goes much further, unless the colonies start becoming burdens, their going to be so powerful that I think some coalition would be established against them. At least unless say a mega-German empire or something else, is seen as an even greater threat to the other European powers.
Steve
|
|
Alternatively it could end up similar to OTL with bitter conflict but with a more moderate Spain, busy converting N Africa, there could be a lot of butterflies. With Spain also controlling much of Italy you could see rivarily between it and the Papacy, which fears growing Spanish power, so you might even end up with Spain going Protestant.
