Which single state in the 15th century was so important to shaping the history of subsequent centuries...

Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.

Could we go so far as to say that this is the case until the industrial era? In which case England would takes the dominant role in power, followed by Prussia? Certainly the French dominate the 17th century, although I am not certain about the 16th.

The 15th century was defined as the rise of ottomans so obvsly ottomans

...

If France was so important and weighty in the 15th century, why couldn't they conquer those squabbling German and Italian states?

Because real life is not a Paradox Games map painting simulator.

>Georgia between all those Turkic/Mongol Khaganates
They and the Gilakis have seen some shit.

Portugal

>no discovery of the sea route to the india
>no european imperialism in asi
>no discovery of the americas
>no gold rush, price revolution, slave trade, plantation economy etc
>no great divergence, europe is still a poor shithole compared to china, india and persia

I once read about Armenia and it's a sad - mixed feeling.
Aside from that, in Greece, bro-tier people!

France, Poland or Ottoman Empire

Burgundy (for bad)
Portugal (for good and for Jared Diamond's butthurt)

Moldavia was Polish vassal, not Lithuanian

France, Ottomans and Poland

Because you don't annex territory randomly irl. Like the other guy said, real life isn't eu4

The Papal State.

/thread.

>Top Tier
Ottoman Empire - Were it not for them closing the silk road, I'm unsure that the """age of discovery""" and events after would have unfolded the way in which they did

France - because war, territorial influences, etc.

>Top tier

Spain - expansion into the Americas, fisheries, etc.

Netherlands - proto-capitalism, etc

Portugal - Same as Spain

Removing a single person (Columbus) from the board would change history the most.

Ottomans
France
HRE
Spain
in this order

They tried you ignorant wobbleshotz, but all of Europe would make sure they wouldn't.

>mentioning some irrelevant at that time countries like England, Spain and France
>almost nobody mentioned Poland, Lithuania nad Hungary, countries that were inhibiting Ottoman expansion into Europe for many years
love this delusion and lack of education

I'd say France was always important.

But I agree about Poland-Lithuania and Hungary

Try to play EU mod what punishes to much expansion and you will see why.

>HRE
>Single state
You had one job

Machiavelli did know nothing about Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth because it was weak non-important hole out of real European politics.

England: the mother of modern civilisation.

>Polish-Lithuanian Union before 1569
>Single state
>Crown of Aragon and Crown of Castile before 1516
>Single state

True, but not everyone knows when Polish-Lithuanian or Castille-Aragon union happened. On the other hand not knowing how HRE looked like means Veeky Forums is not the right place for him.

Papal states

>Machiavelli did know nothing about Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth because it was weak non-important hole out of real European politics.
That's because it peaked around 1600s.

In order

Spain (new world)
France (cultural conquest and military might)
Brandenburg (reformation)
England (america and the raj)
Teutonic Order (germany, by extension lenin)
Ottomans (cause of most problems in balkans and ME today)
Muscovy (russia -> soviet union)
Savoy (italy and the destruction of papal temporal power)

He said 15th century.

Yes those arw all 15th century states, in parenthasis are their effects over subsequent centuries

How is Brandenburg, Teutonic Order, Muscovy more important than Poland-Lithuania and Hungary at that time?

He asked relating to subsequent centuries, read the OP

Total byzaboo thing to say, but looking at this map and considering the relatively small (at the time) size of the Ottoman state, I can't help but think had it not been for Manzikert, a Byzantine state would have continued to exist until the present. But losing the rump of Anatolia (which after the main arab invasion had been the main native population center for the byzis), it was inevitable more or less

If it wasn't Manzikert, it'd have been another battle that either flooded the east with Seljuks or the West with Normans and Bulgars.

It wasn't Manzikert so much as the subsequent civil wars and politics of the Komenan restoration that lost them central Anatolia.

Venice would be an interesting one
>west loses its one real intermediary with the East
>no massive Venetian naval defense covering the rest of Europe from Ottoman naval advances
>Printing probably takes much longer to get started
>lack of Venetian trade monopoly means trading with ottomans is far more worthwhile for Spain and Portugal, likely preventing or stalling the Age of Discovery

Didn't mean to quote

>15th century
>Spain
WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?????

the infighting was nothing more than a symptom of the post-Basil mismanagement of the roman economy + armies that had allowed old enemies time to recuperate and new ones time to build up in strength like the seljuks and the normans

Isaac I Komnenos abdicating is the event horizon for roman anatolia.

DUBS OF TRUTH

>Poland

Explain? Were they ever actually important?

I'm aware of the senselessness in speculation, but I can't help it.

I'm also aware of how it wasn't Manzikert in and of itself that fucked Anatolia. It was more the capture of Romanos followed by a lengthy civil war where some of the fucks asked for Turks to stream into Anatolia in order to create more disarray what did it in.

But it isn't necessarily the case that anyone else would have threatened the Byzantines in the east, following that 1070 or so, the Seljuk state fell into its own lengthy civil war, and not long after, even the Abbassid Caliphate retook control in Baghdad, meaning that if the Byzantines had held onto Anatolia for just another 20 to 30 years, there wouldn't have historically been anyone to challenge them in that area of strength for a few hundred years.

Too, whose to say Venice ever becomes a powerful commercial power capable of bypassing Byzantine hegemony if Alexios never grants them hiiighly favorable trade rights owing to his attention being all tied up in the east. Hell, whose to say the crusades aren't butterflied away?

Sorry, wrong thread. And not to knock the Ottoman Empire, which is fascinating and wondrous in its own regard

I agree, the power vacuum would change all trade. I've played paradox games long enough to loathe the Venetians.

If the power vacuum were absolute, it'd be fun to see the khanate's butted up against the HRE, teutonics and Hungary. Would be my pick just for the bloodfest

France dominated from the 17th century to the early 19th one
In the 15th it was Spain

As OP asked for, Central Europe would go absolutely nuts.
For example, when erasing early 15thC Poland.
>Teutonic Order is in height of power and loses the only serious rival,it's only a matter of time before Lithuania&Novogrod&Muscovy get conquered.
>It takes some time, but now you have TO with population of France and with a lot greater possibilities to grow
>Prussia happens
>Unification of Germany few hundreds years earlier
>Now you have Germany with population greater than rest of Europe put together, with size of stormfag's wet dreams
If not Prussia/Germany, then Russia would be at the gates of Europe a lot earlier. But this time without occupied population of great number rebelling at each sign of Russia's weakness, cockblocking them quite successfully.
In this area it was win everything or lose everything, with Poland acting as stabilizer.
.

>from the 17th century
France dominated after the 30 years war

1. Castile
>Discovered america
>first state to institutionalize their language
>Created the first modern state
>Kicked the French out of Italy
>Destroyed the English fleet
>Destroyed the Hanseanic's league trade dominance
> Monopolized wool trade with Flanders
2. Ottomans
>Destroyed the Roman empire
>Conquered half of eastern Europe
>Forced lots of alliances and territorial changes inside Europe
>Closed trade roots which forced the Portuguese to find new ones.
3. Austria
>Habsburger marriage autism
4. Portugal
>Started the age of exploration
5. France
>Huge cultural,military and economic relevance.
>Biggest population
>Kind of outdated tactics and bureacracy
6. Burgandy
>Flanders
7. Venice
>muh trade
>Irrelevant tier
Everything else.

Spain didn't even exist in 15th century

>Teutonic Order is in height of power and loses the only serious rival,it's only a matter of time before Lithuania&Novogrod&Muscovy get conquered.

Because none of those btfo the TO before,right?
TO was trash and lost more times than they won

>H
>R
>E

meanwhile
>Eastern
check
>Roman
check
>Empire
check

>all of Ireland conquered by the 15th century
hate this meme
they couldn't even map the whole island and Ulster was a complete mystery before the plantation in the late 16th and early to late 17th century

>Holy
According to the idea that an emperor crowned by the holy pope, the emperor himself would have holy properties
>Roman
According to succession of the 7 world empires and its head of state, just like the emperor of Rome being crowned by the pope
>Empire
An empire is largely comprised of several entities ruled under one crown, so yes it's an empire. An empire doesn't need to have colonies to be an empire even though there is huge scientific debate on what constitutes an empire in the first place.

Mongol Hordes would be closer to Europe

No to mention stronger Ottoman Empire

France and the Iberian crowns of Aragon and Castile.

>Aragon
Irrelevant as fuck. The only thing that they did in the XV century was losing wars and get annexed by Castile. Portugal was way more important

Ottomans

Definitely not the spaniards, in the 15th century it was too early for them to have an impact.

I'd go with France.
Interesting seconds would be Habsburg Austria and the Otoman Empire

/thread/

lol no

Spain was almost irrelevent till the end of the 15th century, then it exercised its power in the Americas rather than in Europe, where it was pegged to the Habsburg HRE

>Definitely not the spaniards, in the 15th century it was too early for them to have an impact.
Castile controlled the Brittish canal and Seville was the most important trade hub in Southern Europe.
The HRE relied on Spain not the other way around. The Spanish army was bigger,better equiped,better trained and had better commanders

First national states appeared in 16 century.
Most important city states were in Italy and Greece.

>15th century
>Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth