Ok. I was wondering what would be the best most plausible way to collapse the Ottoman Empire between 1840 and 1860? By collapse I mean that their control is reduced down to modern day turkey(perhaps with them also losing Constantinople).
AHC: Collapse the Ottoman Empire between 1840 and 1860
- Thread starter IchBinDieKaiser
- Start date
archaeogeek
Banned
Greece would need a powerful patron.
Wait, no, Greece had powerful patrons and it was still a backwards fifth rate power.
Early Bulgarian and Albanian nationalism might help, but then Thrace remains firmly Ottoman because Greece wont get Macedonia if the Bulgarians have a say in the whole thing. And this probably doesn't help Greece.
Somehow things collapse around the Crimean war, but the chances of Thrace turning into a Kaliningrad type place are low.
Wait, no, Greece had powerful patrons and it was still a backwards fifth rate power.
Early Bulgarian and Albanian nationalism might help, but then Thrace remains firmly Ottoman because Greece wont get Macedonia if the Bulgarians have a say in the whole thing. And this probably doesn't help Greece.
Somehow things collapse around the Crimean war, but the chances of Thrace turning into a Kaliningrad type place are low.
Well, it doesn't have to lose constantinople, that would just be an extra cookie.
archaeogeek
Banned
The only way I could see it is if more powers than Austria and Russia start treating the Balkans as their backyard, each with their own puppet, but that has the problem that the 1840s-1860s Ottoman Empire was probably more stable than the other great powers except maybe Russia. Plus there's ultimately little of interest in the area that's worth it for France and Britain except Suez, and the med is France's backyard already.
An Arab Rebellion could be interesting; you'd need the khedive to be less of a shit, then you've got the Ottoman Empire down to its pre-Mamluk conquest borders.
Earl_of_Somerset
Banned
Britian and France are each given ottoman lands if they help russia in the Crimean War.
Franch can get libya and syria the British Palestine and Mesopotoamia. Russia expands into the balkans. Greece grabs more land. Then if the balkans are cut in two the adrianic coast side could be snatched up. (Maybe by two siciles?)
Franch can get libya and syria the British Palestine and Mesopotoamia. Russia expands into the balkans. Greece grabs more land. Then if the balkans are cut in two the adrianic coast side could be snatched up. (Maybe by two siciles?)
archaeogeek
Banned
Except Britain didn't want a more powerful Russia, and France neither. Powerful Russia threatens the Suez canal and the Raj. The idea that Russia would bribe them with a few pieces of Turkish land would be rejected and cause a diplomatic insult.
Two Sicilies was a third rate power whose population could care less that the country was called Sicily, Italy or Neo-Oscania. The country would fall in days to an expedition of barely a regiment in size.
Keenir
Banned
the Jannissaries manage to kill every single Ottoman royal (wait, no, that was more Napoleonic in historical location)
um...
How else could Garibaldi succeed with a thousand or so volunteers?
That said, it is true that the Ottoman Empire was actually doing fairly well until 1877; it was only then that it truly lost most of Rumelia.
And the other Great Powers would rather prop up the Ottomans to prevent a superpowered Russia - especially with Britain and its stake in the Great Game, et al.
Grey Wolf
Donor
The best way is to have an Egyptian-French alliance even to the point of war with the other European powers.
Other than that, you could have different repercussions from 1848
Or from Napoleon III's coup - a strong part of his backers within the armed forces expected his coronation to mean immediate war with Britain
An Anglo-American War (Aristook or Oregon) could free up powers to go after the Ottomans
You can spin timelines off all of these, as these are PODs that could lead to what you want, you just need to get there from them
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
Other than that, you could have different repercussions from 1848
Or from Napoleon III's coup - a strong part of his backers within the armed forces expected his coronation to mean immediate war with Britain
An Anglo-American War (Aristook or Oregon) could free up powers to go after the Ottomans
You can spin timelines off all of these, as these are PODs that could lead to what you want, you just need to get there from them
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
Grey Wolf
Donor
True, they would have to win at the start, their offensives not get bogged down, maybe Britain and France fall out, perhaps Britain doesn't provide transports for the French army
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
perhaps the ottoman Emperor could die during the Crimean War and a provisional government is formed which performs worse, leading to Ottoman defeat an the loss of some Caucasian territories.
Aftewards, a succession crisis emerges as well as an attempted Janissary coup, leading to Civil War, and the critical weakening of the Ottoman Empire, if not its collapse as the other powers eye up a wounded Turkish empire that may very well be a "sick man of europe"
I'm not familiar with Ottoman politics at the time, so feel free to criticise this idea
Aftewards, a succession crisis emerges as well as an attempted Janissary coup, leading to Civil War, and the critical weakening of the Ottoman Empire, if not its collapse as the other powers eye up a wounded Turkish empire that may very well be a "sick man of europe"
I'm not familiar with Ottoman politics at the time, so feel free to criticise this idea
Grey Wolf
Donor
As far as I can see Abdul Aziz was always going to succeed Abdul Mejid
There seems to have been an intermediate brother but nothing on him and if his mother was "unknown" I don't know if it would have placed him in the line of succession even if he was still alive in 1855
Abdul Aziz was 25 in 1855 so if his brother dies, he's going to take over the government
What might work, is the idea of Russian success at the start of the Crimean War, and an assault on the Ottoman defences before the capital. That might lead to rule by the Vizir or even the generals but not to the overthrow of the Sultan
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
Maybe a brother who leads the Ottoman Army in it's few victories could emerge to rival Abdul Aziz, and could have the Janissaries' backing. As a result, when the Emperor dies,the two brothers could have a Civil War. When it's over, maybe the other powers could come in and pick pieces off the Empire whilt it's busy fighting itself. Though it doesn't collapse, it would be significantly weakened on the world stage.
Just an idea.
Just an idea.
archaeogeek
Banned
Mahmud II had only four sons, two died young (in fact one didn't live to 5). Prince Abdulaziz was the only brother of Sultan Abdulmecid I.
Cuāuhtemōc
Banned
Have the European powers not intefere with Mohammed Ali's against the Ottoman empie or at least delay their intervention. That way, in the end, the European powers can meditate a peace between the Ottomans and the Egyptians, probably granting the new Egypt complete independence and control over the Ottomans' eastern lands barring Anatolia.
Abdul Hadi Pasha
Banned
1840 to 1860 is definitely the best time as much after this and the empire would be too strong to dismember without a general European war. In 1877-78 the Ottomans defeated all the internal rebellions plus Serbia and Montenegro simultaneously, and even that almost managed to fend off Russia one-on-one.
I disagree about France-Egypt. You'd need Britain and Russia to be totally engaged elsewhere for that to work.
I think the best bet is that Russian and Austria back up their ultimatum after 1848 with force, but I would presume the Ottomans wouldn't have stood their ground if they weren't confident of support.