WI Vienna falls in 1529

In 1529, the Ottoman Empire besieged Vienna, but eventually failed in their attack due more to the long supply lines and weather than actual Austrian action. This marked the end of their expansion in Europe.

My question is what would happen if Vienna had fallen in that year and the Turks continued to expand? What would their next target be? Perhaps Italy, Germany, or maybe even Poland. Also, how would this affect the Counter-Reformation, as it would be mostly Catholic countries at their European borders? Would the struggling Protestant Princes of Germany ally with this prior foe simply to alleviate some of the stress of isolation? Or would there be a stall in the movement as the two Christian groups unite to fight a common foe? One must wonder if the Ottoman's enemies could even handle them. Germany and France were dealing with large-scale Protestant movements. England would soon be a Protestant nation. Spain was strong and firmly Catholic. It also had, or soon would have, it's own ambitions in North Africa which would bring it into conflict with the Ottomans.

Discuss

Rex Britanniae said:

Would the struggling Protestant Princes of Germany ally with this prior foe simply to alleviate some of the stress of isolation? Or would there be a stall in the movement as the two Christian groups unite to fight a common foe?

Click to expand...

I think the first point here is certainly a possibility, Christian rulers had no qualms about allying with the Ottomans if it gave them an advantage over their continental enemies - the French did this against Austria during the Habsburg-Valois conflict, even allowing the Ottoman fleet to spend the winter in a southern French port (forgotten which, exactly.)

mattw101 said:

I think the first point here is certainly a possibility, Christian rulers had no qualms about allying with the Ottomans if it gave them an advantage over their continental enemies - the French did this against Austria during the Habsburg-Valois conflict, even allowing the Ottoman fleet to spend the winter in a southern French port (forgotten which, exactly.)

Click to expand...

The French, however, never had a land border with the Ottomans, and as it was had very little in common with the Ottomans except for a common enemy in the Hapsburgs. The German Protestants were a lot closer to the Ottoman threat, and with Vienna having fallen I think that the fear of Hapsburg domination would be greatly reduced. The fear of further Ottoman expansion would also be quite justifiably increased.

In 1529 had Luther definitively broken with Rome, or was there still wiggle room to possibly bring the Protestants back into the fold? I could see the Hapsburgs as much more willing to make theological compromises with Luther if Vienna had fallen to the Turks.

Come to think of it, Luther did publish something that called for holy war against the Turks - can't remember what the damn thing was called though, annoyingly.

Matthais Corvinus said:

In 1529 had Luther definitively broken with Rome, or was there still wiggle room to possibly bring the Protestants back into the fold?

Click to expand...

It's probably a bit late. He was under an Imperial Ban from 1521, and the Peasants' War had already happened. OTOH, It was probably still possible to crush them.

Philip said:

It's probably a bit late. He was under an Imperial Ban from 1521, and the Peasants' War had already happened. OTOH, It was probably still possible to crush them.

Click to expand...

Philip

If you mean crush the Protestants I rather doubt it. Especially in this scenario when the Turks have stormed Vienna and are threatening both Germany and Italy. Some extremists might want to go for a holy war against the heretics to win back divine favour. However most will be looking for any allies and I suspect some patched up agreement, at least to differ without major conflict while both are threatened by a greater menace.

Steve

I believe that the next target would have been Italy... The Turkish Sultan had threatened the Pope to destroy the Vatican and turn St. Peter's Basilica into a stable for his horses... If i am not mistaken he had a mega-tiara like the Pope's constructed with 4 crowns instead of 3 in order to show the Pope that he had greatest authority than his...

This will most likely stregthen the Lutheran with Bohemia leaving Habsburg orbit and either choose a king among their own Protestant noble or some German Protestant prince as their king (maybe Saxonys or Palatines elector or even going after a minor German Protestant noble) to keep the Turks away. You could also Ferdinand I embrace Protestantisme to keep the Bohemians loyal and and help him find allies among the German Protestant nobles.

Valdemar II said:

This will most likely stregthen the Lutheran with Bohemia leaving Habsburg orbit and either choose a king among their own Protestant noble or some German Protestant prince as their king (maybe Saxonys or Palatines elector or even going after a minor German Protestant noble) to keep the Turks away. You could also Ferdinand I embrace Protestantisme to keep the Bohemians loyal and and help him find allies among the German Protestant nobles.

Click to expand...

I don't think that is going to happen. The loss of Vienna is probably going to in a rather perverse way strengthen the Hapsburgs' hand. In OTL the Hapsburgs were able to rather successfully battle both the Protestants and the Ottomans. With the fall of Vienna the Protestant-leaning German princes are now faced with the prospect of an Ottoman invasion. Their hostility toward the House of Hapsburg may suddenly fade in the face of that foreign invasion. That being said, they will probably exhort huge concessions from the Hapsburg. Or they could stab the Hapsburg in the back on their hour of need.

Okay, so by 1529 Luther had gotten well on his way toward a German translation of the Bible and had gotten married. However, he had also sided with the Princes against the peasants in the Peasant's War, and, as shown in this little bit of wiki-knowledge:

Luther insisted on the Real Presence of the body and blood of Christ in the consecrated bread and wine, but the other theologians believed God to be only symbolically present: Zwingli, for example, denied Jesus's ability to be in more than one place at a time. But Luther, who affirmed the doctrine of Hypostatic Union, that Jesus is both man and God

Click to expand...

This means that he had in two very important issues sided with the powers that be, and then with the orthodox (that is the Roman Church's) intrepretation of the eucharist.

So basically, I would argue that though Luther had significantly radicialized, he was not totally beyond the Pale. The conflict with the radical Protestants over the Eucharist, and his siding with the Princes, probably means that if the Ottomans looked poised to invade Europe (having just taken Vienna) then he would be willing to compromise.

The Hapsburgs are going to be willing to compromise as well. I think that in the wake of Vienna falling, you could very well see a Council among the pro-Luther Protestant clergy (backed by the Protestant-leaning German Princes) and the Roman Church (fearing the further encroachment of the Ottoman Turks, and being pushed by Charles V) that could result in a (temporary) compromise in Germany.

Perhaps with the compromise between the more moderate Protestants and the now scared pragmatic German Catholics, the new allies work to not only staunch the bleeding on the southern frontier, but to stop what both identify as a very grave threat- the spread of the Anabaptism.

So I actually really like the idea of a temporary theological compromise, accompanied by parallel compromises (ie exhorted concessions) between the Charles V and the German Princes (both Catholic and Protestant Princes can get in on this act)