Orthodox Constantinople by 1950?

Honestly, if Greece does take Constantinople and there does end up being a population exchange with Turkey, I expect there to be an expulsion of Muslims regardless the effect on the city. This happened in Thessaloniki, why not the ancient Greek capital?

This expulsion will definitely hurt the city. Quite frankly, if Constantinople does not remain the natural destination for Anatolian migrants, I expect the city to never recover anything like its former stature, that it would just be a regional centre like Thessaloniki. Constantinople will never be as big as Istanbul.

The Greek population of now-Istanbul, along with the Greeks of adjacent islands in the Marmara, were spared the early 1920s population exchange, in exchange for the Turks of western Thrace being allowed to stay. The Greeks of Istanbul left only after pogroms in the mid-1950s.
Do you think Constantinople would be the capital or Athens?
 
Do you think Constantinople would be the capital or Athens?

Constantinople certainly has prestige, but Athens has a century of history and is additionally more defensible.

I mean Constantinople was 31% orthodox in 1919 (and another 8% Armenian as well). So you wouldn't need to change much.

Getting rid of most of the remaining 61%, perhaps replacing them with Anatolian Greeks, would do it, yes.
 
I mean Constantinople was 31% orthodox in 1919 (and another 8% Armenian as well). So you wouldn't need to change much.

I would assume that the Armenians would be allowed to stay, as they would not be considered any problem for Greece, so you could probably calculate them with the Greek part of the population in the city.
 
Constantinople being conquered by an Orthodox polity, Greece or Russia or Bulgaria, which then went on to expel the indigenous Muslim populations, would do it.

You would need both the Greeks and the Bulgarians to pull this off and even then they might need Great Power backing, most likely a Russia that didn't have the Revolution succeed. You need enough people on the ground to kick out most of the Muslim population.
 
The native population of Constantinople was Greek. They made up 20-30% of the city in the early 20th century, until they were expelled. If Constantinople is given to Greece, they get to stay with the rest of the Christians, while the Muslim half of the city's population may be wholly or partially expelled instead.

Based upon what were they the native population? They were the minority in the early 20th century, so at that point Turks were the native population. If you go back far enough, the Thracians (and the Romanized Thracians) were the native population until the Greeks took over. The Greeks were then the native population until they were supplanted by the Turks.
 
Had the Greeks won the Battle of Sakarya and advanced on to Ankara to encircle and decisively defeat the Turkish revolutionaries, it is likely that the Greeks would be able to negotiate peace from a position of power, unlike the Treaty of Lausanne of OTL. Perhaps Constantinople and Western Anatolia would be demanded by the Greeks, and given by Britain and France, as they were the main contributors to the war against the revolutionary Turks.

It seems that the Greeks did hold the strategic advantage in the Greco-Turkish War, but the abrupt defeat at Sakarya allowed the Turks to reorganize and attack with greatly strengthened morale. Without this morale boost and the ever increasing threat of Ankara falling to the Greeks, it is unlikely that the Turks could turn the tide back as they did in 1922.
 
Based upon what were they the native population? They were the minority in the early 20th century, so at that point Turks were the native population. If you go back far enough, the Thracians (and the Romanized Thracians) were the native population until the Greeks took over. The Greeks were then the native population until they were supplanted by the Turks.

What does being a minority have to do with being (or not being) native? As for the Thracians, they had disappeared long ago, so in ~1920 the Greeks were the natives - being the oldest of all groups in the city.

You could argue that Turks are the native population now since there's no older population in Istanbul anymore, but back then that was not the case.
 
But many of the Turks would have been descended from pre-1453 migrants, just as many Greeks would have been descended from post-1453 migrants. Talk of relative indigeneity is, I think, ultimately mistaken.
 
But many of the Turks would have been descended from pre-1453 migrants, just as many Greeks would have been descended from post-1453 migrants. Talk of relative indigeneity is, I think, ultimately mistaken.

Many of today's white/hispanic/whatever Americans may have Native American ancestors, but they have long since completely assimilated into the new communities and thus aren't counted among Native Americans. The same applies to Byzantine converts who gradually assimilated into the Turkish population. That's how I see it, anyway.

In any case, the idea that Greece was going to "expel the native population" of Constantinople is inaccurate and strangely phrased - by any definition, the Greeks a significant part, if not the whole, of the city's native population. (it's also assuming Greece was going to expel all Turks, which it probably wouldn't have)
 
If this occurs in the wake of WWI, then WWII will likely still occur like OTL. How would the German occupation of Greece (and by extension Constaninople) impact the war in the East? Afterall, couldn't the Germans move supplies via sea to the Soviet Union?
 
.
If this occurs in the wake of WWI, then WWII will likely still occur like OTL. How would the German occupation of Greece (and by extension Constaninople) impact the war in the East? Afterall, couldn't the Germans move supplies via sea to the Soviet Union?

Why would the WW2 still be likely to occur? Maybe there would be another great war, but this would be bound to create a lot of butterflies. The consequences of the butterflies are very hard to be sure about. They are bound to have an impact on things happening in Germany. The question of course is in what way it would influence Germany. This depends a lot of how it would influence other countries.
 
.


Why would the WW2 still be likely to occur? Maybe there would be another great war, but this would be bound to create a lot of butterflies. The consequences of the butterflies are very hard to be sure about. They are bound to have an impact on things happening in Germany. The question of course is in what way it would influence Germany. This depends a lot of how it would influence other countries.

How would the rise of Nazism be prevented by Greece aquiring a little extra territory? Hitler will still demand the Danzig off of Poland and the Allies will still go to their aid.
 
How would the rise of Nazism be prevented by Greece aquiring a little extra territory? Hitler will still demand the Danzig off of Poland and the Allies will still go to their aid.
No one knows. That is the point. It might even lead to the Nazis coming to power much quicker and possibly an earlier war. It all depends on the butterflies. First of all this would lead to revanchism on the part of Turkey, which could have implications for the alliance system. Maybe they ally with Germany.
 
Honestly, if Greece does take Constantinople and there does end up being a population exchange with Turkey, I expect there to be an expulsion of Muslims regardless the effect on the city. This happened in Thessaloniki, why not the ancient Greek capital?
The Turks in Thessaloniki left only during the mutual population exchange in the 1920s.

Would the allied powers during WW1 have been able to convince Bulgaria to change side by promising them Constantinople?
This would never happen since Russia wanted Constantinople for themselves.
 
Why wouldn't there be a population exchange in this setting, Turks to Asia and Greeks to Europe?
In OTL the population exchange only happened after the entire Greek population of western Asia Minor was expelled by Turkey in the aftermath of the Greek-Turkish war. Circumstances would be different here and a population exchange might be avoided.
 
In OTL the population exchange only happened after the entire Greek population of western Asia Minor was expelled by Turkey in the aftermath of the Greek-Turkish war. Circumstances would be different here and a population exchange might be avoided.

So, the Turks were the ones that started ethnic cleansing, while the Greeks only started expelling Turks after the Turks had started expelling the Greeks?
 
So, the Turks were the ones that started ethnic cleansing, while the Greeks only started expelling Turks after the Turks had started expelling the Greeks?
Not exactly. The expulsion of the Muslims of Greece was agreed at the treaty of Lausanne to be exchanged with the Greeks of Turkey, which were mostly those of Eastern Thrace and what remained of the Pontic Greeks.
 
First of I don't thing that Russia had the opportunity or capacity to conquer the city on their own back then. For the Bulgarians I am not certain of their complete history at that point and for that reason I am not going to explore that possibility. On the other hand, for Greece it was a plausible goal. Just before the treaty of Lausanne the Greek army had managed to reach the surrounding hills of Ankara if I am not mistaken, but they hadn't established secure supply routes.

The reason was that the previous months (or years not sure) a referendum was held in which there were two main camps.
The first one wanted king Constantine the first to reclaim the throne after the death of his son, and the second one supported Eleftherio Venizelo. The main difference between the two camps was that Constantine was a supporter of Germany in WW1 and wanted to remain neutral, while Venizelo was a favorite of Entente.

Obviously Entente was against Constantine and for that reason stopped supporting Greece in this war. That is also why the Greek army pushed as much as possible without proper supply routes (along with other more complicated reasons). And I an not completely certain if that is accurate but just before the end of the war more divisions were transferred from Constantinople to the Asian front because the generals of the Greek army believed that the city would fall in a short amount of time.
 
Last edited:
Top