WI: Ottoman foothold in Italy?

What if either Mehmet's 1480 attempt to take Otranto or the 1565 Great Siege of Malta had succeeded, giving the Ottomans a foothold in (or off the coast of) Italy? Could the Ottomans have pressed their advantage and taken the penninsula? What would be the effects of a Muslim power threatening (or even taking :eek:) Rome?
 
That's an interesting question.

If they managed to capture, occupy and otherwise integrate it (well, as far as possible) then I expect that their will be constant crusades
for a few centuries until either it's retaken or the Christian states basically get their asses collectively handed to them to such an extreme
as to stop.
 

Cook

Banned
I’d guess a Crusade to free Holy Rome and a campaign of Reconquista in the Italian Peninsula like the one in Iberia.
Much like when the Saracens invaded Italy and Sicily.
 
This topic has actually been discussed for several times, but it's been a while... :)

That's an interesting question.

If they managed to capture, occupy and otherwise integrate it (well, as far as possible) then I expect that their will be constant crusades
for a few centuries until either it's retaken or the Christian states basically get their asses collectively handed to them to such an extreme
as to stop.

I’d guess a Crusade to free Holy Rome and a campaign of Reconquista in the Italian Peninsula like the one in Iberia.
Much like when the Saracens invaded Italy and Sicily.

While there will going to be crusades, it won't be so much of an annual thing. IOTL when the news of Ottoman troops have landed in Italy reached Rome, the Pope decided to pack and leave for Avignon. Seemingly related to that, France actually took the invasion with very little respond. Had Italy been conquered by Ottomans, I think there will be two vital consequences :
1) Ottomans setting their own client Pope in Rome (or keeping the Pope in Constantinople instead), and..
2) The Pope in Avignon would come under the dominance of the France.

Both conditions seem ripe for igniting a colossal splintering of Roman Catholic Church. Not to mention the roots for Reformation in Germany were already there back then. The whole Italy would most likely come under he umbrella of Ottoman-backed Pope, with the possible exception of Piedmont (if it'll be swallowed by France instead), while French dominance over the "free"-Pope will bring political consequences that will effect Europe at large. Some may argue the splinter of the Church won't be inevitable, and they may have a point, but I think the Church's unity will be in a very dire situation....

As for Ottoman Italy, I think that it can last for centuries, and will be generally fairly stable throughout the period. I don't see the Italian states north of Rome will have the will to form a solid coalition opposing invading Ottoman troops, which were generally considered as a horde of invisible monsters at the time, and I can see most of them will eventually become vassals of the empire. Besides, being under empire's umbrella will mean for the Italian traders that the eastern trade will be opened up again for them....

Also, with Italy under Ottoman domination, the Meds will be almost of an Ottoman lake, if not already one. Emirate of Granada can and will may utilize this situation to ensure their survival against the onslaught of reconquista....
 
Last edited:

Philip

Donor
What if either Mehmet's 1480 attempt to take Otranto or the 1565 Great Siege of Malta had succeeded, giving the Ottomans a foothold in (or off the coast of) Italy? Could the Ottomans have pressed their advantage and taken the penninsula?

The Ottomans achieved some very impressive expansion in this period, but opening another major front might too much. To do this, the Ottomans would have to weaken their position in Hungary and the Balkans or Mesopotamia. Both the Safavids and the Habsburgs are likely to take advantage of this.

The whole Italy would most likely come under he umbrella of Ottoman-backed Pope, with the possible exception of Piedmont (if it'll be swallowed by France instead),

I don't know if France would sit aside while the Ottomans pushed that far north. France was quite interested in northern Italy at the time, and nearly swallowed it in the War of the League of Cambrai. As soon as the Ottoman advance threatens French aims, their alliance will come apart.
 
This topic has actually been discussed for several times, but it's been a while... :)
Ridwan's right, there was an earlier discussion about an Ottoman invasion of Italy under Mehmed that was quite interesting...


While there will going to be crusades, it won't be so much of an annual thing. IOTL when the news of Ottoman troops have landed in Italy reached Rome, the Pope decided to pack and leave for Avignon. Seemingly related to that, France actually took the invasion with very little respond. Had Italy been conquered by Ottomans, I think there will be two vital consequences :
1) Ottomans setting their own client Pope in Rome (or keeping the Pope in Constantinople instead), and..
2) The Pope in Avignon would come under the dominance of the France.
I agree on both counts.

Both conditions seem ripe for igniting a colossal splintering of Roman Catholic Church. Not to mention the roots for Reformation in Germany were already there back then. The whole Italy would most likely come under he umbrella of Ottoman-backed Pope, with the possible exception of Piedmont (if it'll be swallowed by France instead), while French dominance over the "free"-Pope will bring political consequences that will effect Europe at large. Some may argue the splinter of the Church won't be inevitable, and they may have a point, but I think the Church's unity will be in a very dire situation....

I would be one of those who would argue that the reformation as we might recognise wouldn't happen. With the Papacy falling under French control, the church in germany would probably fall under the power of the Emperor and maybe the princes. This gives the establishment a very powerfull incentive for the maintenance of the catholic status quo and with Charles V being butterflied away, the reformation would be crushed in its cradle (maybe the nordics go some form of protestant though).

I could very easily another Papal schism though.

As for Ottoman Italy, I think that it can last for centuries, and will be generally fairly stable throughout the period. I don't see the Italian states north of Rome will have the will to form a solid coalition opposing invading Ottoman troops, which were generally considered as a horde of invisible monsters at the time, and I can see most of them will eventually become vassals of the empire. Besides, being under empire's umbrella will mean for the Italian traders that the eastern trade will be opened up again for them....

Also, with Italy under Ottoman domination, the Meds will be almost of an Ottoman lake, if not already one. Emirate of Granada can and will may utilize this situation to ensure their survival against the onslaught of reconquista....
While I agree with most, I doubt Grenada will survive. If anything, Ottoman Italy will hasten its decline.

The Ottomans achieved some very impressive expansion in this period, but opening another major front might too much. To do this, the Ottomans would have to weaken their position in Hungary and the Balkans or Mesopotamia. Both the Safavids and the Habsburgs are likely to take advantage of this.
Ah, but with Ottoman focus on Italy, your unlikely to see Suleiman invade and get Louis II killed at Mohacs. Without Mohacs and the Hapsburgs inheriting, you'll likely see it either go to an Hungarian familly or the Jageillons continue to survive. Either way, they are unlikely to be amazing friendly to the Hapsburgs.

I don't know if France would sit aside while the Ottomans pushed that far north. France was quite interested in northern Italy at the time, and nearly swallowed it in the War of the League of Cambrai. As soon as the Ottoman advance threatens French aims, their alliance will come apart.

Could the Ottomans not play on North Italian fears of the French absorption? If they guarrantee their continued existence as vassals, and with a puppet pope (better an Italian than a Frenchman), they might get the North Italians to fight against the French and Austrians.
 
1) I would be one of those who would argue that the reformation as we might recognise wouldn't happen. With the Papacy falling under French control, the church in germany would probably fall under the power of the Emperor and maybe the princes. This gives the establishment a very powerfull incentive for the maintenance of the catholic status quo and with Charles V being butterflied away, the reformation would be crushed in its cradle (maybe the nordics go some form of protestant though).

I could very easily another Papal schism though.


2) While I agree with most, I doubt Grenada will survive. If anything, Ottoman Italy will hasten its decline.

1) The main seeds for reformation as political event were mostly the growing economy and independence of Northern Europe particularly northern Germany, from the southern Europe where the Papacy lies. With Italy falls into "non-European" control, RCC will have its gravity power severely damaged and almost certainly will be gone. I certainly agree that we won't see a Reformation as we recognize.

2) Ottoman Italy will certainly going to alarm Iberian Christians greatly, so Granada will going to race with time, but I won't say that they wouldn't have a slightest chance.
 
Ah, this again. I'll say what I said last time-while I'm sure an Ottoman invasion of Italy is feasible, I don't think it'll have quite the long impact people seem to think it will. Such an invasion would demand a large logistics train, and draw away forces from the Eastern and Northern frontiers. Furthermore, the only major supply route is by sea, which makes the army vulnerable to blockade. Finally, I just don't see the other European powers tolerating the situation in the long term. They may accommodate it for a while, but as soon as there's any sort of weakness-say, the Safavids invade-someone will take advantage of it. It's just too tempting of a target otherwise, and much closer to home and more valuable than the Balkans.
 
The answer is different in the two periods. In 1480 Italy would be in trouble, and I think we've been over the idea of a Crusade - it's not going to happen, and the Ottomans aren't Granada.

Ottoman effort against Italy would have been a lot more profitable than banging their heads against the Hapsburgs. The supply route to Hungary and Vienna is long, whereas Italy is reachable by sea - in effect even though its further, it's closer.

Malta would have been useful to support Ottoman possessions in North Africa, but by this period Italy would have been too difficult to attempt as the military balance was equalizing and Italy was a lot less vulnerable.
 
Would Catholics in Italy willingly follow a Pope set up as a puppet (a Poppet, if you will :D) by the evil Mohammedans?
 
If were talking a major attempt to conquer south-central Italy in 1480 what was the state of the Ottoman siege capacity at the time? There were a lot of fortifications in the peninsula at the time but the were basically medieval in design. When the French stormed through to Naples in ~1500 they shocked a lot of people with the speed with which they took a lot of fortresses. However this was partly due to very recent advances in their artillery and some of the places had resisted long sieges by less advanced forces only a few years earlier.

If the Ottomans have a similar capacity they can very likely overrun much of Italy in a similar way, before that prompts a strong panic reaction from other powers. If they have something still similar to that from the siege of Constantinople, when the very large and heavy siege guns were built in situ then they may struggle to get far into Italy.

Steve
 
Why not? The Orthodox population followed the "puppet" patriarch.

With the Orthodox, though, there was the issue of the Ottomans being more respectful of their religious freedom than the Catholics were and they'd have VERY recent "close encounters of the worst kind" with attempts to Latinize and Catholicize them.

Furthermore, given this is a foreign invasion and you've been very anti-imperialist in the past, why would you assume the Italians would be more submissive to the Ottomans than, say, certain Iraqis or Pashtuns are to Americans?
 
Furthermore, given this is a foreign invasion and you've been very anti-imperialist in the past, why would you assume the Italians would be more submissive to the Ottomans than, say, certain Iraqis or Pashtuns are to Americans?

Not really about submissiveness of the Italians, but Ottoman rule will bring them back the eastern trade Ottoman had previously closed to them. Southern Italy will be under Ottoman rule because they have little choice, but northern states like, for example, Venice, will have the luxury of the option of eastern trade opened up for them again by being Ottoman vassal.

Pasha is certainly more of a technical person then an idealist one.
 
The answer is different in the two periods. In 1480 Italy would be in trouble, and I think we've been over the idea of a Crusade - it's not going to happen, and the Ottomans aren't Granada.

Universal Pan-European Crusade will be 28076980702% impossible, but I can see a major invasion declared as a Holy Crusade to "liberate" Italians commenced by France to happen at least once.
 
Top