Effects of Vienna (1529) on England's Great Matter (1529-33)

[John Fredrick Parker]

In OTL, about the time that the Ottomans were besieging the (Hapsburg) Austrian city of Vienna (September 27 to October 15 1529), Cardinal Wolsey's fall from grace in the court of Henry VIII was reaching a critical turning point; on October 9th, the cardinal was charged with “praemunire”, handing over his seal of office a few days later, and on the 22nd plead guilty to the charge, surrendering all of his property to the King.

However, this was not the end of the story OTL -- Wolsey and King Henry managed a rapprochement a few months later, in February of 1530; however this was not to last, as a papal edict in October of that year ordering Henry to leave Anne Boleyn and return to Katherine lead, over the course of the next month, to cardinal being arrested once again and then dying in custody. Two years later (November 14, 1532), the King of England married Anne Boleyn in secret, with a public wedding following a couple of months later (January 25, 1533).

What I'm interested in here is -- what is the likelihood that any of this would be significantly changed if the Ottomans had successfully taken the city of Vienna in October of 1529?

 

[alexmilman]

Why should there be any serious change? For Charles V this would be an unpleasant event but affairs of Austria had been handled by his brother. Probably the relevant question is would it make a substantial difference in the War of the League of Cognac but this seems to be unlikely: by 1529 the League was already falling apart, Clement was in captivity after the Sack of Rome, Venice sued Charles for peace, France withdrew from Lombardy and signed Treaty of Cambrai in August of 1529. So Charles would have free hands to deal with the problems in his hereditary lands.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

Why should there be any serious change?

The one reason I can think of is maybe the pope doesn’t try to split up Henry and Anne, with Charles having a harder time of it and not wanting Anti-Hapsburg christian powers to be indifferent to Turkish campaigns in Europe. Failing this, though, I expect the matter to broadly play out as OTL, at least through the Boleyn marriage.

 

[alexmilman]

The one reason I can think of is maybe the pope doesn’t try to split up Henry and Anne, with Charles having a harder time of it and not wanting Anti-Hapsburg christian powers to be indifferent to Turkish campaigns in Europe. Failing this, though, I expect the matter to broadly play out as OTL, at least through the Boleyn marriage.

My question was rather rhetorical because your intended meaning was reasonably clear.

The problem is with:
(a) the timing: the ATL fall of Vienna happens AFTER Charles already dealt with his other problems (War of the Cognac League) and has absolutely free hands to deal with the Ottomans (or to delegate the issue to his brother who was ruling in the hereditary lands). The Pope was in Charles' hands and the rest is OTL.

(b) the geography: Vienna is too far away from anything really important to Charles and Suleiman would not be able to advance too much further due to the usual problems of the Ottoman army organization and logistics. BTW, I suspect that the alleged numbers are blown out of proportion: in 1632 his 2nd attempt to attack Vienna failed because all his army was delayed for 4 weeks by siege of a tiny fortress Güns (Kőszeg) that was defended by 700 - 800 Croatians and did not have any artillery. Surely, if Suleiman had any really big force (forget about alleged 120K) he'd just live a small part of it for the siege and kept marching.