Ottoman perceptions of the Americas

Like say Byzantine Emperor, was impossible to stablish an ottoman colony in the New World. But, forcing a few the historical facts i think that we can have a good scene for our what if althought, not where you say guys, around the Caribbean sea and the Aztec Empire.

As laterly you was looking, the question here is North �frica. That will be the base where our ottomans will begin this enterprise. Since 1516, the ottomans are involved in Algeria (in Lybia before) and along the 20's of that century they could stablish an strange relation of self goverment and centralization between the barbaries and the anatolian Reis family; then they will conquer Tunis and in the 70's will help to put a friend sultan in Morocco. Come back to 1520, Libya had famous pirates but they are centered around the Mediterranean, contrary, our new friends the barbary sailor people, few years in the future they will provide to the Ottoman empire with the better sailors and sea captains of the Mediterranean, they are fervorous allieds and have an atlantic sailing tradition since they trade with moroccan atlantic ports, and laterly will attack place so far from each like Canary islands and Great Britain. In 1518 died Oru� Reis the first Beylerbey, and was replaced by his brother Hizir Reis, Barbarossa, this is our man.

What if: Barbarossa and the ottomans, who know since time ago about Am�rica (see Piri Reis) see the chance of an expansion into the ocean. The first problem are the ships, the barbary types are fast and good for piracy and quick voyages in the small Mediterranean, but, for the ocean it's needed other type of ships, oceanic carracks like the iberian powers. This is not a problem, a lot can be taken by the force and the ottomans do it quickly, with this first vessels, wich are copied at the moment, the muslims launch several exploration expeditions on the north Atlantic following and valuing the accuracy of iberian charts. Are goods althought change very fast.

First problem: the iberians had closed the ways and is impossible to do anything but with furtivety. The spanish had a total control of the routes between Gibraltar and the Caribbean sea, they sail each year with 50 or more high sea vessels so the land to the north of Tierra Firme (Venezuela) is impossible to take. The portuguese have a regular trade with Orient based on around 10 superpoweful ships plenty of artillery, and a more numerous trade with their colonies in �frica NOTE: (I think that a what if based on the ottoman usurpation in �frica can be more credible) Fortunatelly, the last muslim explorer have expanded their global knowledge stolening several charts of this portuguese, charts sea routes, of �frica and a costly map (one ship was sunked in the action) took from one carabel in rout to Asia. Conclusion: the iberians had a plenty dominion of two of the three routes to the rest of the world.

But, a third route have only little transit an the control of the christians is poor: to the southwest. A land called Brazil is property of Portugal but there aren't anybody there, in fact, Portugal will not have interest for this strange land until 1530. So our barbary-ottoman explorers after two years of intense search have a good option in the New World (Brazil was the weak point of the portuguese until 1570, the french triyed unsucesfully to stablish there) In 1520, an ottoman expedion go down by the atlantic �frica with the winds and sea currents and reach Brazil in few times.

Second problem: the land is not good for the mediterranean cultives and isn't good for the ottoman way of warfare. Worst, the portuguese have attacked the colony with small forces and surelly they will try again. The colony must be destroyed but in the last moment an spanish ship, lost in the route to Cuba, have sunked in the colony. They have charts of more land to the south and say that few years ago, in 1516, a colony called Buenos Aires was destroyed by indians and from that time anybody have interest in settled there, and less in this year of 1521, a huge indigenous empire have been conquered by Cort�s! Our intrepid colonist have a new chance and go to the south, where they find a perfect place where put a settle, the R�o de la Plata in modern Argentina. The climate is similar to the motherland, the land is rich and could provide goods harvest of cereals without problem, into the continent, the land expanded in a beatifoul plane perfect for the turkish cavalry.

The colony is far, but the communications aren't impossible. The real problem for the ships is come back to the Mediterranean, two routes, go up by the african coast and turn by east �frica and reach Egypt, routes severely watched by the portugueses. But our explorers are intrepid, and after years they are good atlantic sailors so is not impossible althought very hard come back. (HIGHLY HYPOTETICAL)Spain after time know about this colony in "her" territory and think about sent an expedition, but the opportunities in New Spain are greats and the ottomans surelly will die there against those indians and the hard winters, no problem by now.

From their new colony in Argentine, we must force to our muslims for explore many lands in few time (isn't impossible, see the spanish explorations of North Am�rica). They find hunting peoples in the plains in front of the colony, to the south cold regions with hunting peoples, and to the north primitive agricultural societies in modern south Brazil, similar to those of the destroyed colony in north Brazil. The surprise jump when a cavalry expedition of turks see with surprise a huge line of mountains in front of they, but must turn back before the winter (that is, in July )The next year, the colony sent a new expedition of a few mounted men and foot archers, plus several allied indians 100 no more. Advancing along the inmense plain, wich give good memories to a few tartars adventurers, they finally go into the mountains and talk with the natives: they are farmers, members of a brave tribe called the araucans, but they are subjugated to a powerful and severe king; few days then, and official of this king appear where the muslim are (we are in 1527): announce to the strange people that this land is a property of the divine king, the son of the gods, the Inca that reign in this empire called Tahuantinsuyu.



The dettails of the shock of civilizations since 1521 for you friends


Edited by Ikki - 25-Jan-2007 at 15:04

From Ikki's POW, I guess it's possible for Ottoman Empire to emerge as the naval power that could overwhelm even the British Royal Navy. If Ottoman controls much of America, the Turks would realize that the significance of navy would be important. Instead of Ottoman Empire concentrating on the Balkans... (Other than putting more troops and defense systems) they would form pirate warships that could hunt down the trade routes like Britain did to the Spain. Britain would be outraged, but other European nations might see this as a chance to end the Britain's sea supremacy.

Originally posted by pekau ...

Pekau, you are talking about England like was in the XVIII century, the english involvement in the New World was nothing until the second half of the XVI century and the first continuous colony wasn't stablished until 1600; the Royal Navy was a navy involved in european affairs and weakest than the iberian navies until the 80's of the XVI century, and not the first until 1700 after the defeat of the Dutch. Forget by now to the british.

Pd. Forget too, totally, any collaboration between spanish and ottomans.


Edited by Ikki - 25-Jan-2007 at 13:38

And yes, I got confused with the date. Sorry...

Uh I made some search about ottoman africa, absolutely no knowledge(Just I guess).

 

http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osmanl%C4%B1_topraklar%C4%B1nda_%C5%9Fuan_bulunan_devletler_listesi

Originally posted by pekau Originally posted by Ikki Originally posted by pekau ...   Pekau, you are talking about England like was in the XVIII century, the english involvement in the New World was nothing until the second half of the XVI century and the first continuous colony wasn't stablished until 1600; the Royal Navy was a navy involved in european affairs and weakest than the iberian navies until the 80's of the XVI century, and not the first until 1700 after the defeat of the Dutch. Forget by now to the british. Pd. Forget too, totally, any collaboration between spanish and ottomans.   Why not? History witnessed some bizzare alliance that should not ahve made sense. Remember Nazi-Soviet Nonaggression Pact?

The nazi-soviet rivalry is a joke in comparation with the spanish-muslim strugle

Can't be, because by this time since the Chatolic Kings "Spain" was in conflict with the ottomans, and during the reign of Charles V the conflict increased in a hard war in North �frica and the Mediterranean sea, in North �frica the ottomans supporting indirect or directly to the barbary states against the spanish cities of there (a lot along the Maghreb coast), in the western Mediterranean in a long an wasteful war of piracy and sack and in the central ordinary war with the ottoman fleets in the defence of Italy.

The 20's of the XVI century was a period of relative calm in the mediterranean theatre of this war, until the imperial (mainly spanish) invasion of Tunis of 1534.

The only allied of the ottomans was France (wich is not few , the second power of Europe) Those traitors french () prefeared aid to the infidels than lost against the imperials.



Byzantine Emperor said

Soon, I want to reply to both of them to the best of my ability.  In the meantime, lets keep the timeframe in the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, please.

Please don't lost many time with the thinghs that i said, the discussion go by good way in the first page, in the way of analisis the hypotethical relations between the muslim ottoman power and the natives and i don't want lose the sense of that good discussion. I only propose to change "aztecs" by incas, and ummm arawaks by mapuches in a very few more credible setting. Anymore.

Originally posted by Byzantine Emperor  Would they approach the natives in the same way as they approached Europeans, diplomatically? .

Originally posted by Mortaza Uh I made some search about ottoman africa, absolutely no knowledge(Just I guess).   One source I see, says ottomans went to coast of tanzania, north of chad, niger, mali, senegal and have hegomony over moritania and  Western Sahara. I am not sure If these countries have pagan population. Also I suspect source a little:)(well more than a little)   http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osmanl%C4%B1_topraklar%C4%B1nda_%C5%9Fuan_bulunan_devletler_listesi

Umm no Mortaza, i don't know well the ottoman activity in eastern �frica, but in the north and the west they don't overpassed the limits of Algeria and the Fezz�n (Libyc desert) Modern western S�hara was a confuse territory where lived several tribes many of they vassals (with very weak relations, more friends than vassals) of the sultan of Morocco. The moroquians advanced in the 90's of the XVI century across the S�hara with a powerful and modern army and attacked the N�ger region where the Songhay empire, conquering their main cities (as Gao and Tombuct�) This lands had a muslim elite (well, in the great cities the majority was muslim) and a country mainly pagan.

But no ottomans here.

that is an interesting question. Though most forumers here answered the question from many aspects, I might be redundant in stressing the following answers:
First, one factor that aided the Spaniards in conquesting the Aztec regions and most of the region is the epidemic spread of smallbox in 1520-1521, less than a year of Spaniards landing. Wikiepdia states 10-50% casaulties due to newly introduced disease, however other accounts on similar contacts to Latin American Natives push the ratio of fatality much higher. In either cases, the Ottomans, British, Spaniards or any arrival from the Old World would have the advantage of the epidemic spread in conquering the area.

Second, a similar trend to Native Americans is the hospitality and welcoming attitude to new arrivals. The Aztec welcomed the Spaniards in Tenochtitlan or in Florida around St. Augustine area, the story continues identical where the welcomed temporary guests are now realized to be colonizers and hostility would evovle as witnessed by history. The conclusion here that had the Ottomans landed there, they would have gained the factor of natives cooperation and hospitality at the begining, however the story might had a different end. Whereas Spaniards engaged in temporary alliances with some Native Americans, a direct Spaniard rule is a subject of no negotiation with a Spaniard direct governor. However, the Ottomans are known in instituting cooperative native rulers, thus an indirect Ottoman authority.

Third, the Spaniards had a major goals to achieve, a primary goal for sure was gaining wealth through ownership of gold and silver sources. This requires direct ownership of land and right of extracting those metals. Trade was not the mean to increasing wealth. The Ottomans on the other hand were setting already on major trade routes and trade with Italians ports and Indian ports was on regular basis. Had the Ottomans reached the New World, gold would have not been a deriving motive, neither direct ownership of its sources is a goal. Thus, eliminating the possibility that the Ottomans would institute direct ownership of land and its wealth, and the chances of hostility toward Natives.

Fourth, the Ottomans did not have an institution of missionary work, neither they instituted forced conversion in the lands they conquested in Europe. Out of all of the vast area they controlled of Southern and Eastern Europe for more than half a millenium, only Bosnians and Albanians converted to the Ottomans religion, Islam. Therefore, it is hard to imagine the Ottomans attitude to change once an Ottoman Central American colony is established.

After all of this, why didn't the Ottomans take the adventure, I would agree with what Jagatai said. 1500's were the peak of Ottoman expansion in Europe and the Middle East, whereas Spain and Portugal were struggling establishing their feet on various ports on the costal lines of Northern Africa, Red sea, and Oman. In addition, the Ottomans were preoccupied by their wars with the Safavid in the East and Eastern and Central Europe in the West. Remember than Colombus did not sail till the conquest of Grenada in 1492, as any war is a hault to financing any ambitious plans of discoveries, including Ottomans sail to Atlantic.
Add to this, Spain and Portugal both are located on the Eastern shores of the Atlantic. Would Colombus present his plan to sail to the West of the Atlantic to his home Italian merchants Genoa and Venice, the Holy Roman Empire in Central Europe, the Ottoman Sultan in Constantinipole, or to the Portuguese and Spaniards (In reality he presented the plan to both)?
Finally, the internal Jelali revolts in Anatolia in 1500's and 1600's (at least 5 major revolts!) took a heavy toll of money and lives and definitely distracting the Ottomans from any ambitious plans. Revolts and civil disorder is fatal for overseas colonies (the French lost their first colony in the Americas in Florida due to home unrest and civil war between the Catholics and Reformers (Protestants) ). Even if the Ottomans were able to establish a colony in Central Asia, it would be a short lived one.

Edited by �ok ge� - 28-Jan-2007 at 16:43

I found your primary sources about the fall of Constantinople in 1453 but boy they are impossible to purchase so I am waiting for an interlibrary loan.