The see became vacant, the question is if an election would be held while the war is still underway or not. Technically election of the ecumenical patriarch should be still subject to the "General Regulations" of 1860, probably modified TTL for the election of Meletios IV, with the removal of the requirement for the sultan to approve candidates. But the regulations called for the election by a mixed body of clerics and laity. With Constantinople, nearly all of Asia Minor and Greece over the Olympus occupied there are... obvious technical difficulties.Is there even a Patriarch of Constantinople at this point?
The see became vacant when Chrusanthus was hung, if it remains vacant until Constantinople is liberated by Allied (presumably Greek forces for the same reason that French forces liberated Paris) why not just appoint the Metropolitan of Athens Patriarch and downgrade Athens.
What was built was an additional line going from Alexandroupolis through Kesani/Kesan to Tyroloe/Corlu and from there straight to Constantinople, instead of having to follw the existing line going north to Andrianople and from there to Constantinople. But first you need to get to Andrianople...was it? @Lascaris. And if it was , what is its carrying capacity? Can it support logistics for three corps (the minimum needed for an assault on the European side (two by land one by aero-naval operations)? We also to forget that this railroad can be flanked through Kresna Gorge or the Edirne/Adrianople gap from Axis forces in Bulgaria.
I'm shocked, shocked that I left that open. How could it happen?So on the status of Constantinople in the post-war world there is a lot to look at:
ITTL Constantinople voted to join with Greece June 27, 1940 but crucially this was a non-binding referendum and even though de-facto Greek control started around this time; with the departure of the high commissioners aside from the British and Greek ones; de-jure Greek control was only proclaimed with the British and French abandonment of the city February 19, 1941. By March 13th, 1941 the city was secure enough in the hands of Turkey that they felt comfortable executing the Patriarch. So de-jure Greek control lasted at most a week or two, was almost immediately challenged by Turkey, and only occurred because the Greek army refused to declare an open city and evacuate as the British High Commissioner wanted them to do. What will a crucial point in the post-war negotiations is did the French, British, USA, etc. recognize the declaration of Enosis in February 1941 in any way, shape, or form. The story doesn't mention it one way or the other.
They are still on 1941 TOE... or in other words WAY less artillery and heavy weapons than the units fighting in the active fronts. And they've been mostly static garrison forces since early 1941...I do think overall though there is a higher chance of the first Greek boots in the city crossing the straits rather than marching through Thrace. I would also wonder at the quality and TOE of the 2 Turkish division left in the straits area. Are they still up to standard in equipment, numbers, and training or have they been raided by active fronts over the last 2 years to the point that they are little more than a heavily armed gendarme fully capable of occupation but would have difficulty resisting even a small push from the Greek army crossing the straits.
Well it looked like a good idea at the time. but then at the time it looked as if Germany was going to be the dominant power in Europe and Britain about to be forced to come to terms...Executing the Patriarch, even if he was a clearly partisan actor, seems like something which won't easily be forgotten come peace time.
The point from the Greek point of view both in this and in the Greek units not following the British and French out of the city was solidifying the Greek claim for after the war. How well does this work out...The obvious rebuttal is that the Turkish/Muslim population had no say in this referendum whatsoever. I frankly doubt any of the Allies recognized the referendum.
Between 1921-41 you had the Asian side of the city being the Italian sector and the European side being the British, French and Greek sectors. Given differences in policies and tensions erupting to occasional violence for two decades it would be unsurprising to see more pronounced Turkish population growth of the Asian side compared to the European side and vice versa. Post the current round of unpleasantness it wouldn't be surprising to see arguments for separating the communities altogether no matter the actual status of the city.Of course post-war I’m sure many of the Turks of Constantinople will have fled with the retreating Turkish armies and many of the rest will be ethnically cleansed, so the Greeks will win.