Ottoman Empire Aids Charles XII During the Great Northern War?

What's in the Tin.

What would happen if the forces of the Ottoman empire decided to work with Charles to deal a crushing blow to Russia?
 
It would be interesting to ponder what if the Ottomans took Peter the Great prisoner after the Battle of Stănileşti in 1711
 
They did and Peter ceded Azov back.
Peter incited uprising of the Ottoman vassals and invaded their territory (second time, the 1st were his Azov campaigns) so the Ottomans had no option but confront him. They did not capture him because the Russian army did not surrender but they surely took an advantage of the situation. However, they explicitly refused to follow Charles’ demands regarding continuation of the war even if he was supported by the Khan of Crimea. The major war simply did not make sense for the Ottomans: logistics would not allow them to go further than Ukraine and its permanent occupation also was not a practical option because it would require a permanent deployment of the big number of troops far away from the most important theater, the Balkans.
So the “crushing blow” simply could not happen even before Poltava and after it this was a pure nonsense with Charles being a nuisance rather than a useful ally.
 
Peter incited uprising of the Ottoman vassals and invaded their territory (second time, the 1st were his Azov campaigns) so the Ottomans had no option but confront him. They did not capture him because the Russian army did not surrender but they surely took an advantage of the situation. However, they explicitly refused to follow Charles’ demands regarding continuation of the war even if he was supported by the Khan of Crimea. The major war simply did not make sense for the Ottomans: logistics would not allow them to go further than Ukraine and its permanent occupation also was not a practical option because it would require a permanent deployment of the big number of troops far away from the most important theater, the Balkans.
So the “crushing blow” simply could not happen even before Poltava and after it this was a pure nonsense with Charles being a nuisance rather than a useful ally.
Weren't the Crimeans able to burn Moscow in 1571? Although reduced in size, this shows that their is evidence that supporting a large raid into Russia is possible.
 
Weren't the Crimeans able to burn Moscow in 1571? Although reduced in size, this shows that their is evidence that supporting a large raid into Russia is possible.
They got lucky because most of the Tsardom’s troops were engaged in the Livonian War and they managed to bypass the rest. The next year’s attempt to repeat such a raid (with the inclusion of some Ottoman troops) resulted in a terrible defeat at Molodi.

Anyway, a lot of time passed between 1571 and 1709 and the Russian army of the early XVIII was much more advanced than one of 1570s while the Tatars remained practically the same. Even during the Ctimean campaigns of Vasily Golitsin the Tatars were pretty much on the defensive.
 
Per Robert Massie, Peter the Great:

"In preparing the offer, Peter viewed his prospects with gloomy realism. Knowing that Charles was a guest and now an ally of the Sultan, he assumed that any peace would have to include a settlement of his disputes with Sweden as well as Turkey...he was prepared to surrender Azov, dismantle Tagonrog and give up everything he had won from the Turks over 20 years...to the Swedes he would restore everything except St. Petersburg, his "beloved paradise."...Reluctantly, Baltadji was about to agree [with Poniatowski and the Khan] and give the orders for a grand assault when Shafirov was brought into his tent."

So perhaps the Pruth campaign can end with the destruction of Peter and his army, if only Shafirov is delayed, or Peter holds out one more day before sending his emissary. A decisive Turkish victory that day can see the reversal of virtually all his gains at once.
 
Peter incited uprising of the Ottoman vassals and invaded their territory (second time, the 1st were his Azov campaigns) so the Ottomans had no option but confront him. They did not capture him because the Russian army did not surrender but they surely took an advantage of the situation. However, they explicitly refused to follow Charles’ demands regarding continuation of the war even if he was supported by the Khan of Crimea. The major war simply did not make sense for the Ottomans: logistics would not allow them to go further than Ukraine and its permanent occupation also was not a practical option because it would require a permanent deployment of the big number of troops far away from the most important theater, the Balkans.
So the “crushing blow” simply could not happen even before Poltava and after it this was a pure nonsense with Charles being a nuisance rather than a useful ally.
Also the Ottomans had other priorities at the time, going after the Venetians and the Austrians was high on their agenda. Russia, not so much.
 
What would anything he took from the Turks in 20years and everything from the Swedes except St Petersburg entail?
 
What would anything he took from the Turks in 20years and everything from the Swedes except St Petersburg entail?
Peter took nothing from the Ottomans "in 20 years" because there was no Russian-Ottoman fighting between Treaty of Constantinople (1700) and the Pruth Expedition and by the Treaty of Constantinople Russia did not get anything besides the Azov area, relief from the tribute to the Crimea and agreement about cessation of the raids on both sides (Crimeans, the Don Cossacks and Zaporozhian Cossacks ). So by the Treaty of Pruth reconfirmed in 1713 through the Treaty of Adrianople Peter returned Azov, demolished fortifications of Taganrog and some other Russian fortifications and pledged not to interfere into the PLC affairs (which he kept doing regardless then pledge).
Charles was promised a safe passage to Sweden.

Needless to say that Charles was refusing to leave for 3 more years after the Treaty of Pruth and became such an annoying pain in the posteriors with his never-ending calls for a war that he was eventually placed under the house arrest until he finally decided to get back home.

Proposal regarding giving Charles back all conquered territories except for St-Petersburg (and access to it) was made by Peter before Poltava and by that time he did not yet conquered the main cities of the Baltic provinces, Riga and Revel. So before Poltava there was not too much to return except for Narva and a destroyed countryside in Livonia.

Why would Peter repeat such an offer after Poltava and after conquest of the Baltic Provinces is anybody's guess and why would the Ottomans decide to press this issue is even a greater question. Keep in mind that while at the Pruth Peter freaked out, situation was not very simple for the Ottomans. Assaultс on the Russian camp failed with the considerable losses and the Ottomans expected defeat if the Russians counterattacked (which Peter's generals advanced him to do and which would be what any other Russian commander of the XVIII century would do). On the top of it, the Ottoman supply depots at Brailov had been captured by the corps of general von Rönne. So the Ottomans considered themselves quite lucky and did not even press their initial demand of delivering to them Kantemir (ruler of Moldavia who went to Peter).
 
Seems to me like the Ottomans wanted to beat on Russia but didn't have the gas in the tank for a "crushing blow".

So you'd need to go back a couple decades to find a PoD that strengthen the Ottomans while still making sure GNW doesn't get butterflyed.
 
Needless to say that Charles was refusing to leave for 3 more years after the Treaty of Pruth and became such an annoying pain in the posteriors with his never-ending calls for a war that he was eventually placed under the house arrest until he finally decided to get back home.
He did not decide the leave, he was thrown out by Ottoman troops.
 
What's in the Tin.

What would happen if the forces of the Ottoman empire decided to work with Charles to deal a crushing blow to Russia?
They aided him OTL by repelling Peter the Great in Moldova. The Ottomans cannot really help more than OTL except heading along the river and burn down Kiev (or attack Poland-Lithuania if King August II is on his throne). Actual occupation of the Ukraine is unlikely. The area is rather worthless for the Ottomans, it is controlled by hostile Cossacks and it is impossible to defend an open area so far away. It is worse than defending Hungary.
What the Ottomans and Crimean Tatars can do is divert attention of Peter the Great as much as possible by raiding the South. Peter can ignore it but that is pretty much it what can be done. The fortresses of Taganrog and Azov can be taken. Those are the best gains. The rest of the war has to be fought against the Polish-Lithuanian Forces. Luckily the Commonwealth Forces aren't large which makes campaigning easier than against... Austria for example.

Considering Austria is at war, the Ottomans have to enter the war in the first five years. Maybe Charles XII can avoid going to Poland-Lithuania if he decides to fight Peter's Forces first and get better results rather than moving to Poland-Lithuania and Riga. The latter are easier to deal with without Russia regaining strength. So... let me write about it...
1. Mustafa II never signs a treaty with Russia in 1700
2. There is no active conflict until the words of Russian defeat reaches Narva
3. Mustafa II orders a new attack on Poland-Lithuania and Azov (Austria is fighting the French and Spanish so that problem is solved...)
4. Charles XII pursued the Russians after Narva (this time at least...)
5. Ottomans take over Taganrog and Azov fortresses from Russia and Kamieniec from the Commonwealth
6. August II is forced to face the Ottomans

From this point on one has to assume how it goes. Sweden can destroy the Russian forces, maybe even capture Peter the Great. But Sweden could also face a Poltava way earlier. The Ottoman success in the Ukraine is also up to assumptions. While areas closer to the border are easier to deal with, the further one goes the harder the campaign for the Ottomans. Best case scenario is a conquest of Lvov. If Sweden has eliminated the Russian Military they can redirect their forces against August II. The Saxons losing the Polish-Lithuanian Throne is a big plus. Stanislaw Leszczynski is the potential new King of Poland-Lithuania enforced by Charles XII

Assuming the Swedes eliminate Peter's Forces or Peter as well, there is Poland-Lithuania as a new ally of Charles XII. The Sultan, Mustafa II is never deposed in Edirne and he prepares for a new campaign against Venice or Austria, depending on the course of the Spanish War of Succession.
 
He did not decide the leave, he was thrown out by Ottoman troops.
IIRC, he was throw. out of his “Swedish settlement” and placed under some kind of a house arrest (the hole episode of him shooting at the people who had been his generous hosts for years and bragging about it does not look good, IMO). It took some time for him to get extra guarantees (IIRC, he refused to go through the Russian territory even with Peter’s assurances of a safe passage and ended up traveling through the HRE or PLC ).
 
They aided him OTL by repelling Peter the Great in Moldova. The Ottomans cannot really help more than OTL except heading along the river and burn down Kiev (or attack Poland-Lithuania if King August II is on his throne). Actual occupation of the Ukraine is unlikely. The area is rather worthless for the Ottomans, it is controlled by hostile Cossacks and it is impossible to defend an open area so far away. It is worse than defending Hungary.
What the Ottomans and Crimean Tatars can do is divert attention of Peter the Great as much as possible by raiding the South. Peter can ignore it but that is pretty much it what can be done. The fortresses of Taganrog and Azov can be taken. Those are the best gains. The rest of the war has to be fought against the Polish-Lithuanian Forces. Luckily the Commonwealth Forces aren't large which makes campaigning easier than against... Austria for example.

Considering Austria is at war, the Ottomans have to enter the war in the first five years. Maybe Charles XII can avoid going to Poland-Lithuania if he decides to fight Peter's Forces first and get better results rather than moving to Poland-Lithuania and Riga. The latter are easier to deal with without Russia regaining strength. So... let me write about it...
1. Mustafa II never signs a treaty with Russia in 1700
2. There is no active conflict until the words of Russian defeat reaches Narva
3. Mustafa II orders a new attack on Poland-Lithuania and Azov (Austria is fighting the French and Spanish so that problem is solved...)
4. Charles XII pursued the Russians after Narva (this time at least...)
5. Ottomans take over Taganrog and Azov fortresses from Russia and Kamieniec from the Commonwealth
6. August II is forced to face the Ottomans

From this point on one has to assume how it goes. Sweden can destroy the Russian forces, maybe even capture Peter the Great. But Sweden could also face a Poltava way earlier. The Ottoman success in the Ukraine is also up to assumptions. While areas closer to the border are easier to deal with, the further one goes the harder the campaign for the Ottomans. Best case scenario is a conquest of Lvov. If Sweden has eliminated the Russian Military they can redirect their forces against August II. The Saxons losing the Polish-Lithuanian Throne is a big plus. Stanislaw Leszczynski is the potential new King of Poland-Lithuania enforced by Charles XII

Assuming the Swedes eliminate Peter's Forces or Peter as well, there is Poland-Lithuania as a new ally of Charles XII. The Sultan, Mustafa II is never deposed in Edirne and he prepares for a new campaign against Venice or Austria, depending on the course of the Spanish War of Succession.
The main problem with this scenario is that Charles could not easily (or realistically) destroy Russian forces. Even at Narva he had to negotiate and let the bulk of Russian army out (cavalry simply escaped swimming across the river) because resistance on both flanks had not been broken. Bit even if he fully successful, he can’t march further because there is no food and supplies could not be easily obtained. And where would he go? The closest meaningful target is Novgorod but it is fortified, well-supplied and there is a strong Russian contingent there. Charles could not take even the marginally fortified places if they are defended because his army was lucking a heavy artillery (as happened with Poltava) and he could not conduct the long sieges because he heavily relied upon living off the land (Grodno campaign).

Forcing Peter into the corner? Where would be that corner? There was no “indispensable” place in the Russia circa 1700 and Peter did not give a damn about Moscow (it was regularly burning, anyway, at least once as a result of him celebrating something). Charles was chasing August years across the PLC and European Russia was bigger and scarcely populated. So he would get stuck there forever leaving August free too take Riga, the most valuable Swedish possession on the Baltic coast. Peter still could keep raising the new troops and nothing would be achieved. Anyway, at that point there was nothing he could get from Peter because Russians did not, yet, conquer any Swedish territory.

As far as the Ottomans were involved, I quite agree that a major war of conquest would make no sense to them. Of course, the Khanate was itching for raiding (“it’s economy, stupid” 😂) but there was little gain for the Ottomans. Azov was a minor nuisance and construction of Taganrog only started by 1700. In OTL Azov was returned and Taganrog destroyed by the Treaty of Pruth but in between their existence did not cause any problems to the Ottomans. Taking of Azov was a tedious and costly affair (besides Peter’s example, the Ottomans earlier had to take it from the Cossacks) and its real value proved to be limited: Peter got it, built his fleet and ....absolutely nothing happened. So why bother? Of Charles manages to destroy Peter, then getting Azov back would not be a problem but otherwise it is something on a far end of nowhere.

Of course, Peter was building his Azov fleet but the Ottomans had been holding Kerch thus controlling exit from the Sea of Azov and even during the war (Pruth Campaign) that fleet was doing nothing (quite clearly, with plenty of troops available, it could launch a diversionary attack on the Crimea forcing the Khan to go there instead of Moldavia).
 
Top