As I wrote
here, the Girays taking over the Ottoman Empire has profound effects on the Mediterranean. Of course, this TL I'm working on has a different Med, as Venice has not violently declined. Suleiman was succeeeded by Murad, an insane Sultan whose mother pursued a pacificist policy. As such, as late as the 1 aid, tired of rule under an Ottoman Pasha who has meddled into their affairs for too long and even abrogated their autonomy). Venice had no qualms following an aggressive policy against the Turks following the occupation of age old colonies such as Naxos. Genoa, under the same pressure, banded together with Venice (both covertly funded by Spanish silver).
Venice and Genoa's large banking houses eventually throw their clout behind Giray, supplying vast funds to the Crimean Khanate, turning their steppe forces into a true army capable of taking the crown, and much later taking down the rebellious Egytians. He awarded them with generous land grants: Venice is allowed to annex Morea, which received it's pre-1570 autonomy under the Ottomans
and then some. It was during this time of weakness that Venice expanded her interests further north, bringing her protection and influence over Attica, where the Duchy of Athens is reformed. Yet while Morea had been directly annexed to Venice with significant autonomy, Athens legally remained part of the Ottoman Empire, with the rump Eyalet of Morea simply merely ceased to exist, with Athens taking it's place. The Duchy is granted a generous amount of autonomy, the duchy being hereditary and the duke free to choose his own councillors, with the defense of the duchy being by the Venetians, who had their own troops in Athens, Thebes, and Ypati. Yet it is still very much part of the Ottoman Empire. Friction immediately erupts over the status of Athens and it's exact position within the empire. Some see it as a temporary status to allow the Giray Sultan's to consolidate things, while the Venetians hope to turn it into an economic sattelite, perhaps united with Morea.
The Girays were even more generous in regards to the myriad of former Italian outposts in the Aegean that had been seized in the 1560s by Turkish forces. Lacking the forces to defend them and needing troops for more important campaigns, the Girays were extremely liberal in allowing Venice and Genoa to reoccupy their old outposts. For Venice, this saw the restoration of the Duchy of Naxos, the even older Lordship of Negroponte, and even the island of Lemnos, which despite being a Venetian dependency for a short time was held by the Genoese in the end. For the Genoese themselves, they were granted Lesbos and Chios along with their dependencies.
This brings up an interesting situation. At least on Naxos, the Venetians probably restore the Duchy to the closest heir. In the Morea, the Maniots had no shortage of champs whom they rooted for. With a surviving house of Montferra, it's quite likely that a second son would be inivited to serve as Prince of Morea. For the Genoese, prominent families are probably dolled out these lands as feudal dependencies. Yet this is no Byzantine wank; it's not even a Latin wank, but rather an interesting turn of events (Ottoman extinction) with a bizarre turn of events (brief Neo-Latin revival in the Aegean!). Much like the original Latin dependencies, these are not independent statelets in any sense but dependencies of Venice and Genoa. Colonies with fancy titles. Morea is a pseudo-exception, as the autonomy granted by Venice is coCould this Giray compromise in and around Greece give birth to a number of neo-Latin states? Built upon old foundations of states that were washed away or short lived, their houses scattered. I am not talking of the Duchy of Naxos under say,
Charlotte Crispo and
Lorenzo II d'Medici lasting into the modern day.
Everyone knows Giray is buying time. He is appeasing the west so he can deal with bigger threats; when the time, Naxos, Morea, and even Chio can be taken with no issue. But what sort of cultural effects might a neo-Latinism have on European culture? The Girays, in taking over the Ottoman Empire, won't be concerned with these islands, at least at first. They are dealing with a charismatic force in Egypt that by their enthronement in Constantinople has Egypt and Syria under their thumb, having co-opted the Maronites and other sects in the region. Egypt and Syria will eventually be reincorporated, but it will be the Aegean and Greece that will be the mess, even if Syria and Egypt are open to foreign merchants.
I am not want a restored Kingdom of Jerusalem. I do not want the Muslims permanently maimed and in retreat. I merely want the Venetians and Genoese taking advantage of a weak client (The Girays of the Crimea), only to eventually get fucked over.The Ottoman Empire will merely have a rough spot that some take advantage of, but they most definitely be resurgent, and these tiny states created in the vaccum will certainly be the first to go.
But what matters to me here is the effects of these events culturally: not only in the Christian world, but the near east. With the "Latins" returning, what would the Muslims think? These are not sovereign states, but rather (most probably vis a vis Moea and Naxos, Venetian dependencies). Still, what effect could they have? Naxos and Chios were not intellectual strongholds, but I could see Morea become one especially if the Venetians choose a proper Prince to serve as their governor, most likely a member of the House of Montferrat, given their Palagoloi blood. Could we see Morea become the short lived home of the Greek scientific revolution, until scattered a few generations later by the Girays when they reclaim the province.
There is also the idea of Rhodes in the Turks weakness. Are the Knights fit to make an expedition there... and if they are, would they bother? Perhaps it'd make a fitting propaganda victory to retake Rhodes, but would they consider keeping it? Or simply raid and leave> Again: it may make a fitting home for a generation, but the Girays will come knocking it will be even more bloody than the first siege that ousted the Knights to Malta. Ditto with another Knighthood finding a home in the Aegean, the Knights of St, Stephen. Worth it, or a waste of time on their end? If worth it, then where?
Even if things end sadly for these neo-Latins (and they will), I can see the short lived period of Neo-Latinism as being quite popular in many circles. The Catholic Church and Catholics especially would probably support it following the end of the religious wars and the War of the Austrian Succcession as way to unite the faithful, while Protestants deride it as a false paradise. Yet these "Latin" lands manage to find men from all walks of life: missionaries take up the book and adventurers take up the sword to defend these territories, philosophies, artists, and writers wanting to create works of art and visit those of the years past, such as the acropolis, and even a small trickle true bonafide settlers, who despite having open frontiers in Meridionale (Brazil), Mexico, Peru, La Plata, and even the charted settlements in Virginia (*new name forth coming) by the Scheldt Company, decide to seek their fortunes in Greece.
These Neo-Latin states are fascinating, but they aren't meant to endure. Maybe a generation or two on average, possibly three if they are lucky. They rise due to the unique circumstances of Giray in need, but soon wiped away when he no longer has need of western generosity. Is this plausible, or just plain ridiculous? I'm running on little energy and lots of caffeine and these hands just keep typing away...