What if a strong Byzantine Empire survived to the 20th century?

[BOTP]

Let's assume that the Byzantine Empire managed to survive with its AD 1025 borders, minus southern Italy/Sicily. Let's also assume that it is generally able to keep its border in eastern Anatolia regardless of later historical events (like Tamerlane's invasion). How would it affect the following:

- Would it affect the time of the discovery of the New World?
My theory: Possibly, if the western merchants were allowed to continue their eastern trade via the Empire, there would have been less incentive to find alternate routes. Though eventually someone would have sailed westwards anyway, all it would take is someone like Manuel Comnenus to deport the Venetians and block their trade.

- Would it affect the start of the Renaissance in Italy?
My theory: Perhaps, but not by much. Greek expatriates contributed to it, but no doubt the Italians could have received Greek influences anyway.

- Would it become a colonial power?
My theory: Probably not, just as the Ottomans didn't really become one. Too much territory and little incentive to go colonizing, unlike the smaller western European countries that were seeking more lands.

- How would it affect the Habsburg hegemony?
My theory: I would guess that strong Habsburgs would be seen as natural rivals to the Empire, especially if they started to expand into Hungary and the Balkans. However I cannot quite see the Byzantines taking the place of Ottomans as French allies against the Habsburgs. I think they'd try to undermine Habsburg influence in Italy instead, perhaps working with the Papacy.

- Would the Empire take part in WW1, on whose side, and would it survive intact?
My theory: If it took part, it would probably be on the Entente side. Whether it would suffer a revolution, get broken up like the other multinational states at the end of WW1, etc, I will let others speculate.

 

[Immortal]

Itd be the same backwater empire stuck in the 5th century timewarp it was always in.

 

[Damnyankee]

my theory is would be extreamly similar to the Ottoman Empire. Same separtist movements would happen and so on ans so forth. The only difference is present day Byzantium would be mostly christian, and along with Israel and America, Byzantium would be hated.

 

[Plotinus]

It would have made a very big difference to Russia. Not sure quite what, but a big difference nevertheless.

And, yes, Middle Eastern politics would be totally different. They could hardly be worse than they are today, so whatever they would be like with a surviving Byzantine Empire, they would probably be better.

You can't be certain that the Empire would still be really Christian, though. Perhaps it would have gone through the same social and ideological changes as western Europe in the last couple of centuries. Perhaps today it would be like Britain - theoretically Christian but not really. Or perhaps it would have gone the other way and become more entrenched in its religious views, a development accelerated by its proximity to the Arab world. Perhaps it would foster a deep and abiding loathing of Protestant America.

 

[MaisseArsouye]

I think that one of the consequences would be on a linguistic point of view. Nowaday, greek is posken by 10 millions Greeks and a large diaspora. If a byzantine state survived, greek would probably be its official language. Large areas in nowadays Turkey would still be fully greek. So, greek would be one of the major languages in Europe and in the world.

 

[TrailblazingScot]

1025 A.D

Apparently this was the extent of the Byzantine Empire:

 

[TrailblazingScot]

A thing worth considering is what effect a strong Byzantine would have on the subsequent period of crusades. With a strong Byzantine Empire, it could be either that the Holy Lands would be held by Christians again, or that the Crusaders would be furnished with enough support (directly or indirectly) to hold the Holy Lands.

Personnally, the survival of the 1025 A.D Byzantine Empire without Turkish invasion leads to a future I cannot predict, far too complicated.

 

[Gelion]

Personnally, the survival of the 1025 A.D Byzantine Empire without Turkish invasion leads to a future I cannot predict, far too complicated.

My thoughts exactly althogh I think I would like that future. Byzantine survival had always been one of my "alternative history" favorties.

 

[Adso de Fimnu]

The Balkans would be radically different today. With a strong Byzantine state in the region, no Yugoslavia would be formed, and Bulgaria would lack most of its lands - perhaps it would be incorporated into Austria-Hungary, and today be a small independent nation or even part of modern Hungary.

The Caucasus region would certainly be different - there'd be more Armenians, for one thing, if there weren't any Turks to massacre them in the early twentieth century.

Russian trade via the Black Sea would be limited (and by that I mean nonexistent) if Byzantium were hostile to Russia.

It's a very interesting scenario, either way. Pity it didn't happen this way.

 

[PresidentMarcos]

Hmm...Well, the Byzantine Empire, assuming it remained Greek, would probably be a minor world power, somewhere about the level of France. Of course, if Napoleon still existed in this universe, then Byzantium would be in trouble. If it survived to the present day, however, at this point Byzantium would probably be a consitutional monarchy.

 

[Adso de Fimnu]

Hmm...Well, the Byzantine Empire, assuming it remained Greek, would probably be a minor world power, somewhere about the level of France. Of course, if Napoleon still existed in this universe, then Byzantium would be in trouble. If it survived to the present day, however, at this point Byzantium would probably be a consitutional monarchy.

France is a minor world power? News to me.

I wonder whether the feudalistic Byzantine monarchy (similar, in ways, to Russia's) would have such an easy transition to constitutional monarchy... I think a major uprising would have been much more likely. Whether Byzantium would have become Communist or not, I cannot say.

PS. Bienvenidos a los Forums CivFanaticos, Presidente. A word of advice: avoid Off Topic - it's murder in there.

 

[Xen]

Well...

A) the Habsburgs and Russia would have some definate difficulty in trying to claim ascendeny over the balkens from a sturdy Byzantine empire; as despite troubles with the Slavs, thier was a healthy dosage of "Romanized" slavs in the empire; Belisarius, the eve rmighty general of the dark ages (and one of the top 10 generals in all history, considering what he did, and how little troops, and governmetn support he had to do it with) was himself part slavic; as such, its easy to see how a Byzantine-Russian combien could easilly reign supreme influence over the Balkens (the Russians were almost alway nominal allies of the empire somtimes with very close realtions to it; with the stbailization fo a true Russian state, ti would eb easy to see healthy relatiosn between the two powers

B)I would say that things in Italy woudl be very interesting; on one hand, it woudl be a traditional want of the empire to "drive out the barbarians" (germans) from once Roman lands (lets not forget, even at the end of the empire, they still considered themselves a Roman state), and ofcourse, this would mean italy; if this would mean unifacation into its own state, a tributary stat eof Byzantium, or a full nlown province, is hard to say

C)If Byzantium did get involved into WWI as the war happend in real life, its a certianity that they woudl enter the side of the entent; it was in no interes tof Byzantiums to see any other power aside from it and Russia to have any sort of influence over the balkens, and moreover, Austria was likelly to be a traditional enemy of the empire anyway; however, it coudl also pave the route for more Arabic/general islamic nations involvment in the war, no matter what side Byzantium sided on... (after all, both world wars were in many ways the last echos of nations having long-lasting historicle enemies)

 

[Cuivienen]

France is a minor world power? News to me.

France is a world power because it has veto power in the Security Council.
France is minor because it isn't the US, China, Japan or the UK.

On topic: I have a feeling that the Habsburgs might not have ever come to power at all had Byzantium survived. It was, after all, in the best interests of the French and the Byzantines to keep the Germanic states from uniting in any form, and I think with pressure from the south as well as the west, none of the Germanic states would ever have amounted to much. In addition, with the strong presence of less-corrupt Byzantine Orthodoxy (as compared to Roman Catholicism at the time), the Protestant Reformation might never have taken place, instead replaced by a sort of mass-conversion to Orthodoxy.

 

[Vietcong]

hm, it whold have lost much of its lands in the balkins and much in asia minor, it whold be a small state about the size of greece or bulgeria. deferntly not a major power, and probly in bad shape due to movements of independace*greece ect* and being stuck in a bad spot in ww1.

 

[MaisseArsouye]

France is a world power because it has veto power in the Security Council.
France is minor because it isn't the US, China, Japan or the UK.

Do you really think so ???

Of course, USA and China are much stronger, but I strongly disagree about UK and Japan. France and UK have quite the same power, but the way they show and use it are completely different. And Japan, while having a good "army" ( it has a special name I think ), has neither nukes nor veto power. Japan is an economical giant, but a diplomatical dwarf.

And France's power is not only in its army. Look at the worlwide reactions about the two journalists. THIS is real power, when a lot of countries have respect

 

[Xen]

why would thier be indipendence movements in a Byzantine empire?

please, to those who say greece would wish to be indipendent, or Bulgaria, or the various Salvias in the Byzantine empire; why?

Think about-

A)greece would not want to be indipendent, as it essentially IS the Byzantine empire; the greeks rebelled from Ottoman rule in real life, because the Ottomans were Muslim, and forigners; in the Byzantine empire, everyone would have thought of each other as a "Roman" citizen; there would be no rebellion from the Anatolians, or the Greeks

B)with a strong Byzantine state, the Slavs would not have penetrated into the Byzantine empire enough to have a real majority in any location to call for a real indipendence movement

 

[Gelion]

Good point Xen

 

[PresidentMarcos]

Once in a while, it would attempt to re-assert it's power. And it would remain Byzantine forever .

 

[Cataphrak]

I ran some simulations on civ II with that: with what I did, The byzantine invented modern aphibious landings, buit the suez canal in the 17th century, modernized their Cataphracts with firearms and defeated the egyptians but lost half to Napoleon, and then took over the ukraine and formed an allaiance with poland, repulsed the austrian and russian attacks on that country and catured vienna in the process and ends up being a world superpower as a constitutional Monachy with most of eastern europe, but fractured culturally.

 

[Companiero]

I find it difficult to discuss topics like these, since there's absolutely no way to even predict what might happen if one crucial factor is eliminated from the course of history. However, when such predictions are made based on false facts, then I just might chime in for a response.

why would thier be indipendence movements in a Byzantine empire?

please, to those who say greece would wish to be indipendent, or Bulgaria, or the various Salvias in the Byzantine empire; why?

It is very clear that there would be independence movements in Byzantine Empire sooner or later, even if the Turks hadn't come to power. So the Turks factor aside, you absolutely cannot maintain the fact about a strong Byzantine Empire for unlimited period. Why? Coz it's stupid. (Officialy, because it's not a factor; it's a condition and practically you're not predicting anything, you're imagining situations.)
Now, it's clear that Byzantine Empire would have fallen apart because it grew week from corruption inside, decentralization etc.
Also, it wasnt essentially Greek, but it was a mix of many different cultures. Plus there's the influx of Slavs around Vi century.
There were various kingdoms arising in Byzantia before the Turks. So, it would be the case again, even without them.

Also, a some form of Pretestant movement would have arisen, since Orthodoxy was just as corrupted as Catholicism. Actually, there have been such movements in the Middle Ages in Buzantia, but the arrival of the Turks in a way united the Christians there for the next centuries, to fight the common "religious infidels".
Another consequence could have been many more kingdoms arising during the Late Middle Ages, since there wouldn't be a strong Ottoman Empire to keep the country together, and the present countries would have formed much earlier. There would be no Islamic and Oriental influences in the Balkan cultures, as well as Anatolia, and Ionia would probably be Greek today.
And the thing you mentioned about the Hapsburgs, it is more likely they would have expanded in the Balkans more, since the Turks were the barrier that kept them from Northern Balkan for so long.

Or, if you dont like how I set the conditions, and would rather talk about a highly hypotetical situation of an everlasting strong Byzantine Empire, then my prediction is that it would conquer the world, and we would all be Orthodox today.