AHC: The Great Powers let the Greek rebellion of the 1820s get crushed

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
How could we get a situation, with any PoD after 1815, emerge where the Great Powers let the Ottomans crush any Greek rebellion in the 1820s, the Turks win, and the Turks get at least a couple decades before any repeat rebellion.

Austria under Metternich would probably have been content for the Greeks to get crushed. Prussia probably did not care. The three intervening powers were Russia, Britain and France.

Russia under Nicholas I was somewhat conflicted, on the one hand opposing revolutions as a matter of principle but on the other feeling solidarity for the Orthodox Christian rebels. In the end Nicholas came down against the Ottomans and in favor of the Greeks.

Britain and France, going through the Romantic Era, were sympathetic to the Greeks based not on their knowledge or admiration of contemporary Greece, but on the reputation of classical Greece. That and sympathy for them as victims of Ottoman brutality.

But what could counter these forces such that they all let the Ottomans put the Greeks down and hold them down?
 
A continental war. Maybe a Polish crisis? It distracts every other nation and the Greeks gets crushed just as they had in the 18th century.
 
A stronger Ottoman Empire would have been able to intervene against local elites and alleviate the rebels tax concerns before things got out of hand. Not sure if that's what you're looking for though.
 
The only country you really need to stop from intervening is Russia. If Russia stays out, then Britain and France will most likely stay out as well or at least be less militarily involved. Britain only joined to limit the Ottoman's losses to the Russians and Greeks while France joined to get a seat at the table more or less when it became clear Britain and Russia were intervening.

The best way to keep the Russians out in my opinion would be for Tsar Alexander to live longer. While, Nicholas was an arch conservative and despised all rebels, he was an ardent opponent of the Ottomans and actively sought to increase Russian power and influence in the Balkans at their expense. He also took his role as protector of the Orthodox Christians in the Ottoman Empire very seriously, as seen in the prelude to the Crimean War.

Alexander was much more conflicted on the matter of the Greeks. While he did sympathize with them as they were fellow Orthodox Christians, and as Tsar of Russia he was technically their protector, he was also heavily influenced by Metternich. Tsar Alexander abided by the Congress of Vienna and allowed himself to be strong armed by the Quintuple Alliance into neutrality despite his threats of intervention when the Ecumenical Patriarch was murdered. Even still I don't see Alexander staying neutral forever so the Ottomans best course of action would be to end the war as quickly as possible.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
What are the Europe-wide and Russia-wide effects of Tsar Alexander 1 living through 1825-1850 ?

-Lets the Greek rebellion of 1820s fail - (don't know if the Greeks or another Balkan nation would try rebellion again before 1850)
-Differences in domestic policy - less ostentatious and deliberate reaction?
-Europe-wide - Russia works within the concert, is not making especially new demands of the Ottomans
-Is there a rebellion in Poland in 1830?
 
What are the Europe-wide and Russia-wide effects of Tsar Alexander 1 living through 1825-1850 ?

-Lets the Greek rebellion of 1820s fail - (don't know if the Greeks or another Balkan nation would try rebellion again before 1850)
-Differences in domestic policy - less ostentatious and deliberate reaction?
-Europe-wide - Russia works within the concert, is not making especially new demands of the Ottomans
-Is there a rebellion in Poland in 1830?
Alexander was not 100% sane and late in life he drifted towards religious obsession. He'll do something stupid and will share his father's fate.
 
How could we get a situation, with any PoD after 1815, emerge where the Great Powers let the Ottomans crush any Greek rebellion in the 1820s, the Turks win, and the Turks get at least a couple decades before any repeat rebellion.

Austria under Metternich would probably have been content for the Greeks to get crushed. Prussia probably did not care. The three intervening powers were Russia, Britain and France.

Russia under Nicholas I was somewhat conflicted, on the one hand opposing revolutions as a matter of principle but on the other feeling solidarity for the Orthodox Christian rebels. In the end Nicholas came down against the Ottomans and in favor of the Greeks.

Britain and France, going through the Romantic Era, were sympathetic to the Greeks based not on their knowledge or admiration of contemporary Greece, but on the reputation of classical Greece. That and sympathy for them as victims of Ottoman brutality.

But what could counter these forces such that they all let the Ottomans put the Greeks down and hold them down?

An earlier defeat of the Greek rebels. Mahmud II saw Ali Pasha of Ionnia as bigger enemy and fought against them until 1822. Waste of recources. For at least, Mahmud should have let Ali fight the Greek rebels and waste their recources. Then the Ottomans can intervene.

Mahmud II not executing the patriarch is another thing.
 
Top