AHC: Hungarians defeat all Ottoman attempts to conquer Hungary and Bosnia and Croatia

Not exactly. It indeed played a part in the uprising, but the Kuruc mozgalom was significantly more important. The demolition of the long, no longer needed fortification system right in the heart of the country gradually increased the number of landless and lawless masses (kuruc), which created huge tension. This together with the tension created by the failure of the earlier kuruc uprising and the land disputes in the reconquered lands led to the breakout of the uprising.
All of these are long term consequences of the tripartition of the country.

I mostly agree but i prefer to name more immediate reasons for events than something than happened nearly two hundred year earlier. What I mean is that the condition of the Rákóczi uprising wouldnt have come about without Mohács is true. On the other hand Mohács never guaranteed or even made likely than much later a Rákóczi like uprising would happen. It could have been butterflied away in so many ways in that time period that naming Mohács as the main reason for it is wrong.
 
I mostly agree but i prefer to name more immediate reasons for events than something than happened nearly two hundred year earlier. What I mean is that the condition of the Rákóczi uprising wouldnt have come about without Mohács is true. On the other hand Mohács never guaranteed or even made likely than much later a Rákóczi like uprising would happen. It could have been butterflied away in so many ways in that time period that naming Mohács as the main reason for it is wrong.
Well, I said that it's just a long-time consequence, not a direct one.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
The only part of the Kingdom of Hungary that should be taken is Croatia. Additional manpower for the Janissary Corps, Closer to wealthier Italy and Dalmatia and better defendable against the Habsburgs.

Would this entail taking more of Croatia they took in OTL? My impression is that most of Croatia ended up as part of Habsburg royal Hungary from the beginning, with the Ottomans only controlling a big chance of Slavonia at the same time they controlled central Hungary.

Would you envision the Ottomans stopping at Belgrade and not going for Hungary north of it, but perhaps trying to conquer all Croatia, Dalmatia and Slavonia?
 
Would this entail taking more of Croatia they took in OTL? My impression is that most of Croatia ended up as part of Habsburg royal Hungary from the beginning, with the Ottomans only controlling a big chance of Slavonia at the same time they controlled central Hungary.

Would you envision the Ottomans stopping at Belgrade and not going for Hungary north of it, but perhaps trying to conquer all Croatia, Dalmatia and Slavonia?

Coastal Dalmatia and Zagreb were not conquered as it did not lay in the route to Vienna. Not necessarily important if you have Hungary. Slavonia however was on the road to Buda and Vienna which made sense taking it.

I can see the Ottomans go for Croatia. Especially if the Ottomans really want to go for Italy, that is like Ravenna and Ancona. It offers support from Bosnia and Croatia to Italian campaigns.

The Ottomans were not really interested in Hungary. Odds are Hungary would remain independent if it weren't for the Habsburgs trying to take it. And when Zapolya failed to defend against Ferdinand the Ottomans took initiative and conquered Central Hungary. Otherwise the best the Ottomans prepared to take was key fortifications around the Danube and closer to home: Zemun, Petrovaradin and just maybe Osijek. As a defence for the Balkan. But no more. A vassal Hungary was good. A vassal Hungary without Croatia? Even better.
 
Short of the Ottoman Interregnum triggering the partition or deterioration of that empire, you probably need a fourteenth century POD.....
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Could? Yes. But unlikely. Or Hungary and Bohemia get really really powerful.

Ottomans were the protectors of North Africa while Spain was waging a Crusade there. Not sure if any of them would back off.

What about a grand bargain between Charles I and Suleiman then? Charles yield the North African territories back and stops the Spanish Crusade in exchange for the Ottomans leaving Hungary to Austria/HRE?
 
Coastal Dalmatia and Zagreb were not conquered as it did not lay in the route to Vienna. Not necessarily important if you have Hungary. Slavonia however was on the road to Buda and Vienna which made sense taking it.

I can see the Ottomans go for Croatia. Especially if the Ottomans really want to go for Italy, that is like Ravenna and Ancona. It offers support from Bosnia and Croatia to Italian campaigns.

The Ottomans were not really interested in Hungary. Odds are Hungary would remain independent if it weren't for the Habsburgs trying to take it. And when Zapolya failed to defend against Ferdinand the Ottomans took initiative and conquered Central Hungary. Otherwise the best the Ottomans prepared to take was key fortifications around the Danube and closer to home: Zemun, Petrovaradin and just maybe Osijek. As a defence for the Balkan. But no more. A vassal Hungary was good. A vassal Hungary without Croatia? Even better.

A bit of clarification and an interesting tidbit:
Before the Ottoman conquest the capital of Slavonia was Zagreb and most of Slavonia at the time remained under Habsburg control. Croatia was only the territory next to the adriatic - most of which has fallen to the Ottomans. It was only during the ottoman period, when the habsburg were organizing the parts of royal Hungary still under their control to captaincis (sorry I cant find the correct english term for this military administrativ units, in hungarian they are: főkapitányságok, the whole of Hungary has been organised into six of them) that the border of Croatia was extended north to the river Sava. Zagreb was still the capital of Slavonia. After the reconquest of Hungary a miliary frontier was organized all along the border. The territories in it were outside of the civil administration. As most of the former Croatia became part of this Croatia was moved once again to the north and this was the time when its capital became Zagreb. Slavonia was moved east along the river Drava. So when you say the ottomans conquered Slavonia you are mistaken, as the Ottomans only conquered what later became Slavonia however at the time was not part of it.

One of differences between Croatia and Slavonia was that Slavonia has been part of Hungary from its founding. The bishopric of Zagreb was founded by the hungarian king László I. when Croatia was still an independent staate. An important result later was that slavonian county's were represented at the hungarian pairlament and the croatians were not - this remained in effect till the 19th century.
 
Top