I was thinking of a scenario where in parts of Italy which are Sardinia, Mezzogiorno and Sicily fall to the Ottomans after the defeat of Skanderberg, what would happen if that scenario did happen.
Ottomans in Italy
- Thread starter kasumigenx
- Start date
Senderbeg's guerilla campaign that lasted over 30 years in Albania was a big factor in slowing down Mehmet II Fatih's conquest spree. He had some invasion of Italy in 1480 planned but managed to get just a token foothold in some coastal city, don't remember the details. And since Kingdom of Naples and Papal States were sponsoring Skenderbeg's uprising IRL, you can have a scenario where Turks crush him immediately, and hungry for retaliation to all his immediate helpers invade southern Italy.
And for WI if that scenario happened, I would expect immediate response of France and Spain since it is too close to their borders.
And for WI if that scenario happened, I would expect immediate response of France and Spain since it is too close to their borders.
France and the Ottomans had Alliances on Multiple occasions, even when the Ottomans were in Algieria, Hungary and Austria.
I think it is possible for the Ottomans to take advantage on the loss of the Angevins in Naples and fool them into allying with the Ottomans.
Indeed. Anything like collective responsive christendom mentallity just never existed. There is no question of immediate France action against Ottomans, else they would've had done so by the time Ottomans landed in Otranto OTL, especially since the Pope actually had packed and left Rome by the time the news of Ottoman landing reached him. If that didn't drive France to immediate action.....
Of course, that doesn't mean there won't ever be point of frictions between Ottomans and France in this scenario. It will certainly grow later after a while period of Ottoman involvement in Northern Italian affairs. But no immediate reaction, period.
I'd think Venice and Spain would have something to say on the matter.
To arrive there the Ottomans would have to sail in Venice-dominated waters.
I do not exclude that the Sultan could bribe the Serenissima, but it has to be a very substantial bribe, since the situation would bottle Venice in the northern Adriatic.
Also you have to neuter Malta knights fleet.
And of course take care of the Spaniard one.
With Tunis being allied to Spain, the only friendly harbour is Algeris, but the fleet there is mainly galeotte, which is ok to go pirate-ing around, but hard to do anything else
Last edited:
Venice and the Ottomans have gone to war Seven Times and only won once because of the Great Turkish War/War of the Holy League, which was Austria, Hungary, Russia, Spain, Venice, Poland-Lithuania, The Cossacks, Serbia, Albania and Greece Versus the Ottomans and the Crimean Khanate.
Last edited:
What I mean is that troop ships are basically sitting ducks.
It is ok to use them to ferry across short distance in friendly water (e.g. Cyprus) but it is a big risk to make them cross unfriendly ones.
And say what you want about Venice, they certainly knew their sailing much bette than the Ottomans
The Ottomans defeated the Venetian`s Fleet in the 1499-1503 War and were able to raid Northern Italy.
And won a Naval battle of Spanish, Genoese, Venetian, Papal and Maltese ships in 1538.
well, for example the ottomans themselves (Calebi) said so.
Anyway, my point was only that a sultan worth of his turban would put into account difficulties and try to neuter them instead of ramming head on.
That's the reason of the Sultan OTL making concessions to Venice when he was in mood of attacking Haupsburg and vice versa.
No reason to think he would act differently if he decided to batle with spain for southern italy.
I was wondering which bribe could be big enough of the venetian not to intervene.
On a different subject: France could be a de facto ally of ottomans against spain.
but they should be granted a share of the booty
Anyway, my point was only that a sultan worth of his turban would put into account difficulties and try to neuter them instead of ramming head on.
That's the reason of the Sultan OTL making concessions to Venice when he was in mood of attacking Haupsburg and vice versa.
No reason to think he would act differently if he decided to batle with spain for southern italy.
I was wondering which bribe could be big enough of the venetian not to intervene.
On a different subject: France could be a de facto ally of ottomans against spain.
but they should be granted a share of the booty
Last edited:
There have been a couple threads on this in the past (maybe more).
Definitely seems possible for the Ottomans to take parts of Italy, though I'm not sure Sardinia would be one (its more "Why Sardina?" and less "how?" though).
Here:
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=172042
And here: https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=151474
Definitely seems possible for the Ottomans to take parts of Italy, though I'm not sure Sardinia would be one (its more "Why Sardina?" and less "how?" though).
Here:
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=172042
And here: https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=151474
I think when its clear that Ottomans are already in permanent control of both sides of Adriatic Venice will likely gonna offer themselves as vassal in order to have completely safe access to eastern trade. Overwhelmingly much cheaper then spending to much blood, vessels and money to eject Ottomans from Adriatic.
And the latter wouldn't be very useful anyway - Venice is out for money, not political dominion.
I think the catholic church will be under france in this scenario because the pope lives in France.
I wonder what would happen to Sardinia, Sicily and Southern Italy once the Ottoman Empire collapses or if it does not on this scenario?
I wonder what would happen to Sardinia, Sicily and Southern Italy once the Ottoman Empire collapses or if it does not on this scenario?
All empires decline over time, but the impact of controlling southern Italy (including Sicily for convenience) will be huge. Will it be a net gain or a net drain on the Ottomans? How will it impact the strength and plans of their rivals?
A great deal will change between the 16th and 19th century, that's for sure.
MAlexMatt
Banned
I think there's a difference between taking and holding one city deep on the boot and conquering the whole of Naples and Sicily.
In fact, it's likely that France would get involved, not for specifically anti-Ottoman reasons, but simply because France is interested in acquiring the exact same territory and views the instability introduced by Ottoman invasion as an opportunity.
Truth is, discussions on the issue from the past that I've read suggest me that there hasn't been much...objectivity involved. Some of the people here are apparently quite enamored of the Ottomans and are willing to pretend that real life is like a story where the author can show favor to one side or the other in a conflict and have everything go their way while all their opponents make all the decisions necessary to make that happen.
From what I've read of past topics, and from a casual bit of research into the subject, it would be possible for the Ottomans to take Naples and Sicily, but it would be expensive both in the conquest and the keeping. By trying so hard to take and hold such a comparatively distant region, they give up a lot elsewhere. The longer the Ottomans decide to hold out, the more they give up. Ultimately, I think trying to take Italy would be a strategic blunder, not because they couldn't do it, but because it would be a Pyrrhic conquest, just like the original attempt thousands of years prior.
I think all that I can add that's completely original is to point out how much difficulty another empire centered around the Bosporus had keeping a permanent hold on the exact same region a few centuries earlier. The Byzantines took Southern Italy at the height of their Medieval power, and it was the first province to fall once decline set in.
Waterways can be a great way of connecting distant lands, but only when they are relatively peaceful. Having to worry about the Spanish, the Venetians, and other, lesser Italian naval powers is going to make the relatively small physical distance between the eastern Adriatic Coast and Apulia very large and expensive to cross.
MALexMatt said:
At what point did it become "comparatively distant" to a state with its capital in Constantinople and control of the Balkans?
I'm not sure this is entirely true. Depending on what you define as "decline setting in", but Sicily took quite a while to fall and Southern Italy falling to the Normans was in a situation probably not going to come up here (possible, but unlikely to be duplicated in otherwise very different circumstances than the 11th century).
The Venetians that the Ottomans beat? The Spanish on the other side of the Mediterranean that will be caught up in half a dozen other projects? The lesser powers not even significant enough to name?
I'm not saying this is easy, but it is certainly easier than taking and holding Hungary or Egypt (or Mesopotamia).
I think the Ottomans might change their powerbase or capital to the Balkans if they control the Southern part of Italy.
kasumigenx
I can't see that happening. Constantinople has too much prestige. Also its still ideally placed for the vast bulk of the empire.
Steve