- Status
while the Aydinids haven't been Romanised to the extent the Germynids have I suspect as a result of their unintentional Romanisation and the effects of Tamerlane's invasion they won't be so much as reconquered by the Byzantines but absorbed instead like Pergamon was by the Roman republic.
Events abroad...Anything that has Marinid in the name has already peaked my interests.
Dragos Cel Mare
Banned
You know, Sov, you actually have a knack for making social and economic factors sound, well, fun.
25
Deleted member 67076
I like this idea. I like it alot. Going to steal this.
Or not.
Better late than never.
Ok here's the map, it shows the important players of the world at c. 1385. Take note of all the various changes that have been going on.
Following this I'm going to talk about world events and skip ahead for a bit. Nothing major will involve Romania until the mid 1380s, hence why I skipped ahead.
Germiyanids really did benefit a lot without contributing.
By the way,didn't the lords of Achaea swear their allegiance to Constantinople during the civil war?
Who did John marry,shouldn't he be in his fifties by now?
By the way,didn't the lords of Achaea swear their allegiance to Constantinople during the civil war?
Who did John marry,shouldn't he be in his fifties by now?
Last edited:
Caesar Biden
Banned
Holy shit at the Germiyanids. I mean, they expanded fast, didn't they? I guess being able to exploit both their own resources and those of the Ottomans, combined with the fact most of the credible threats to them not named the Karamanids were exhausted, really let them take off. Still though, that's quite a lot of expansion. The Romans should find no trouble finding Turkish allies against them.
With all of these new conquests, are the Germiyanids still hellenizing? I could see it going either way, as while a great deal of their territory is now Turkish, their center of power would still be fairly Greek. And to what extent will they be Hellenized- will Greek culture merely become more accepted, or will the Germiyanids actively promote a Greek (or even Greco-Turkish) administration?
Another thing that occurs to me about the Germiyanids is that, big as they are, they face some serious problems in the event of a war: flanked on all sides by the enemy, with many gigantic and long borders to defend, and most of their greatest cities concentrated near their most powerful enemies (Rome and Karamanids). They have to constantly appear strong, because their neighbors will exploit at any sign of weakness. Large, disciplined, and well-organized they may be, but they also have rather untenable borders.
Thanks for the map Sov! Great TL, I've been following with interest. One small question: If we're jumping forward to 1385, why hasn't the Empire made a move against Achaea yet? I assume they've focused a lot on internal rebuilding, but claiming this last bit of land in Greece would be a big diplomatic coup for any Basileus.
With all of these new conquests, are the Germiyanids still hellenizing? I could see it going either way, as while a great deal of their territory is now Turkish, their center of power would still be fairly Greek. And to what extent will they be Hellenized- will Greek culture merely become more accepted, or will the Germiyanids actively promote a Greek (or even Greco-Turkish) administration?
Another thing that occurs to me about the Germiyanids is that, big as they are, they face some serious problems in the event of a war: flanked on all sides by the enemy, with many gigantic and long borders to defend, and most of their greatest cities concentrated near their most powerful enemies (Rome and Karamanids). They have to constantly appear strong, because their neighbors will exploit at any sign of weakness. Large, disciplined, and well-organized they may be, but they also have rather untenable borders.
Thanks for the map Sov! Great TL, I've been following with interest. One small question: If we're jumping forward to 1385, why hasn't the Empire made a move against Achaea yet? I assume they've focused a lot on internal rebuilding, but claiming this last bit of land in Greece would be a big diplomatic coup for any Basileus.
Flanders gained independence from France but Burgundy is still part of it?
Aragon took quite a bit from Castile.
England still lost most of Aquitaine to the French,but they gained Navarre?
Aragon took quite a bit from Castile.
England still lost most of Aquitaine to the French,but they gained Navarre?
The colour's clearly different.You must have missed the Roman-English personal Union
BTW,is France even in control of Paris?The entire east bank of the Seine is no longer French.
Caesar Biden
Banned
I must be a little colorblind, then.
I suspect Soverihn was more concerned with the Eastern Med, and merely put up France, England and co because they're important countries. Now that I've said this, though, he'll probably come on and say every little detail was deliberate.
I believe that England's red is slightly sharper than that of the ERE.
Deleted member 67076
With regards to Flanders: IIRC the County of Flanders was merged with the Duchy of Burgundy in 1350, and the Duchy of Burgundy is basically independent at this point. (Yes I know its in the map; my mistake)
With Regards to France: The map represents whats under the control of the French King. As for why much of the North is outside of the control of the king (Who would be Charles VI), its under control of an... interesting group of rebels.
Lets just say the influence of the Zealots of Thessalonica has started to spread, and decades of high taxes, war, plague and banditry (and English Funding) tend to make people very, very angry at their country and at the established order.
Still, any suggestions?
Within the middle, there's going to be a bit of hybrid culture developing.
Oh, and don't forget the various Turcomen in Kurdistan that are going to be extremely pissed they've been pushed out of their fiefs by some upstart tribe that's gone soft.
And as for why Achaea is left alone is because that would mean Naples is probably going to invade in response, once more bringing the age old problem of the Neapolitan state constantly raiding the Balkans, diverting troops and resources away from more important things. If there's an opening, the Romans will grab it. But since this timeline has had no Hungarian intervention in Naples, the kingdom would have gotten stronger, would still have its personal union with Provence, and generally Achaea would look like too much work for too little gain.
What this means is that all the other powers began to jump on the territory if they could. England, being crafty, managed to secure the (very likely brief) independence of Navarre for the time being, and is essentially dominating it to the point of annexation. While Aragon took all their border disputed towns and then some. Hell, even the Marinids have managed to push back the frontier a bit.
With Regards to France: The map represents whats under the control of the French King. As for why much of the North is outside of the control of the king (Who would be Charles VI), its under control of an... interesting group of rebels.
Lets just say the influence of the Zealots of Thessalonica has started to spread, and decades of high taxes, war, plague and banditry (and English Funding) tend to make people very, very angry at their country and at the established order.
Eh, that wouldn't really matter the instant the news of what's been happening to the nobility breaks out. No sane baron is going to bend the knee to an emperor that wants to destroy the established social order
Most likely some noblewoman of foreign origin to seal a peace treaty or one of his distant cousins. Wait, those aren't mutually exclusive.
Still, any suggestions?
Yep. It helps that they've started expanding first into the most developed and heavily populated areas of Anatolia before moving in and conquering the small, unorganized Central Anatolian states and securing many of the important trade routes.
Somewhat. Certain areas will be more Greek than others, so what you'll see is a 'spectrum' of Hellenization with the more eastern areas much more Turkish than the state's powerbase in the West.
Within the middle, there's going to be a bit of hybrid culture developing.
That's what happens when you let greed get to your head and go the easiest route of expanding instead of the smartest.
Oh, and don't forget the various Turcomen in Kurdistan that are going to be extremely pissed they've been pushed out of their fiefs by some upstart tribe that's gone soft.
Thank you!
And as for why Achaea is left alone is because that would mean Naples is probably going to invade in response, once more bringing the age old problem of the Neapolitan state constantly raiding the Balkans, diverting troops and resources away from more important things. If there's an opening, the Romans will grab it. But since this timeline has had no Hungarian intervention in Naples, the kingdom would have gotten stronger, would still have its personal union with Provence, and generally Achaea would look like too much work for too little gain.
Remember, Castile briefly imploded after the Battle of Rio Salado. So you had what was basically the War of 2 Peters combined with the Castilian Civil War all in one. Very messy, very long and full of proxy conflicts.
What this means is that all the other powers began to jump on the territory if they could. England, being crafty, managed to secure the (very likely brief) independence of Navarre for the time being, and is essentially dominating it to the point of annexation. While Aragon took all their border disputed towns and then some. Hell, even the Marinids have managed to push back the frontier a bit.
I put it because I figured someone would ask what's been going on out west.
It looks different to me. I'll change if you guys want.
Yes he is. Be very afraid.
I suggest John marry a Hungarian Princess.That will explain why no one tried to take advantage of the ERE being bloodied in Anatolia.
BTW:Why is Burgundy independent with Flanders?Historically it didn't become de facto independent of the French Crown until the Armagnacs had one of the Duke murdered and didn't become de jure independent until late in the Hundred Years' War,during the reign of Henry VI.Or was that butterflied?Or is the map showing the House of Burgundy-Valois is still loyal to the main branch,but rebels in the North have taken over the entirety of northern France including Flanders?
BTW:Why is Burgundy independent with Flanders?Historically it didn't become de facto independent of the French Crown until the Armagnacs had one of the Duke murdered and didn't become de jure independent until late in the Hundred Years' War,during the reign of Henry VI.Or was that butterflied?Or is the map showing the House of Burgundy-Valois is still loyal to the main branch,but rebels in the North have taken over the entirety of northern France including Flanders?
Last edited:
- Status