AHC: Ottoman-dominated Europe

As the title says, the challenge is to make the Ottomans the dominant power of the European continent. Could you do this by having the Ottomans take Vienna in 1529 and later expand into Italy, Poland, the Ukraine, and southern Germany?
 
Even if the Ottomans had captured Vienna, the problem remains that Empires do not last forever. And after they take Vienna, its not as if the Christians within those areas are going to just disappear. And I doubt they would even go much further.
 
Italy is probably the limit of their westwards capacity: Germany beyond Austria is likely too far from Istanbul for effective campaigning. SE Russia is a possibility if they directly incorporate the Crimean Khanate rather than leaving it as a vassal, and the plan for a Black Sea-Caspian canal by way of the Don-Volga route goes through: that would give them the power projection to keep Russia well to the north of the Black Sea, and perhaps even do an end-run around the Shi'a Persians into central Asia.

Of course, as long as the Ottoman relation with Europe is a sheerly confrontational one, the Ottomans do not so much dominate Europe as threaten it: "Finlandization" is not a concept yet, and making puppets of the myriad squabbling German states is an exercise in herding cats. On the other hand, a strong Ottoman empire might play an important role as a spoiler or king-maker: as early as the 16th century OTL, they made alliances with the French against the overweening Habsburgs. If the Ottomans are to "dominate" Europe, they either need to conquer most of it, which is impossible, or make themselves a relatively indispensible nation and a regular part of the European "concert" (in which case expansion into Asia is likely to be more a distraction than anything). An alliance with Poland rather than a conquest of Poland, once Russia becomes an enemy to both could greatly change the course of Eastern European history, for instance.

Bruce
 
Assuming that the Ottomans were able to conquer and hold, say, Austria Bohemia, Milan and Venice, then the Hapsburgs are pretty much broken. On the other side, the French king is not, and the French will suddenly have lost the need to crush the Hapsburgs, while the pope also resides in France. Quite likely the French king will be elected the next Holy Roman Emperor and start a crusade that unites the power of Germany, France and Italy against the Ottomans.

In short: further Ottoman expansion into Western Europe would IMHO speed up Ottoman decline.
 
Assuming that the Ottomans were able to conquer and hold, say, Austria Bohemia, Milan and Venice, then the Hapsburgs are pretty much broken.

The eastern ones, yes. The western ones, the core of their strength was always american silver and spanish arms, so they are hardly reduced to ineffectuality. But they're no longer so threatening, and will probably unhappily kiss and make up with the French at least until the Ottomans are driven from Italy, (the Popes will certainly be screaming for Catholic cooperation) and the south and central German states will certainly cooperate to drive back so clear and imminent a danger at least until the Ottomans are out of the Empire proper. (I'm doubtful as to whether the Ottomans could actually take Bohemia - logistics, you know).

Ottoman expansion, I'd agree, would be self-limiting, but I'm not sure that it would lead to earlier collapse: Spaniards and Germans and Frenchmen are unlikely to keep cooperating all the long, bloody path to Constantinople [1] - quite likely they start fighting about who gets the thrones of the liberated lands of Bohemia and Austria. Things may well stabilize with the Ottomans a bit further west than OTL: say with all of Hungary rather than part.

And this will be rather different than the stabilization of OTL: OTL the frontier stabilized due to over-extension and the superiority of European defensive fortifications: in this one it will stabilize after a series of Ottoman defeats and reverses in the field. The Ottomans may be less complacent about European power than they were OTL for a century after the second siege of Vienna...

Bruce


[1]Remember, this is not the 1680s: the Ottoman army matches the western powers for quality, and is bigger than that of any one of them to boot.
 
Every empire has its limits for expansion, dictates by geography and demographics.

The Ottoman Empire reached its limits in Europe by conquering the Balkans, and it had a rather hard time maintaining it, but it did so, despite the trouble, in order to maintain a core area around Constantinople, along with a secure borderline on the Danube.

See what happened with Hungary: its conquest was rather the building-up of a buffer zone, together with crippling apowerful enemy. That's why it was lost rather fast and easy.

Furthermore, see what happened with Venice: the Ottomans did not conquer all its possesions in the east, although they could have. They spared them, as they recognized Venice's benefits to the Empire as a commercial "partner".

In the end, the Ottomans were smart enough to see that conquering more and more land is not that beneficial for the Empire, both for the malfunctions of overextension, and the ruining of the economic relations with abroad.
 
It's a possibility if Khan Ogedei didn't die and mongols continued after Legnica and Mohi. They would crush everything on there way, and the Turks would find it easy to conquer europe
 
It's a possibility if Khan Ogedei didn't die and mongols continued after Legnica and Mohi. They would crush everything on there way, and the Turks would find it easy to conquer europe
But with a POD that far back, the Ottoman Beylik may not even emerge, never mind develop the effective military machine that it did OTL.

On the main matter, I have to echo those on the thread who say that the Ottomans were near the limits of their expansion anyway. There could be small gains made within German lands, and parts of Italy could be gained, but most of Europe is too far from the Ottoman center of power in the Balkans to be taken and held for a significant time.
 
Assuming that the Ottomans were able to conquer and hold, say, Austria Bohemia, Milan and Venice, then the Hapsburgs are pretty much broken.

I think Milan and Bohemia are quite a stretch. France had some nice designs on Italy, and only initially allied with the OE to stab the Hapsburgs in the back. Even if they are allies early, later on their relations will likely sour.

Bohemia will attract the other states of the HRE's attention, I think. If any, southern Italy (preferably Malta or Sicily) and/or Venice will likely be the most likely candidate for the Ottoman window to the west.
 
Top