Ottoman Victory in Vienna 1683

Ridwan Asher

Emperor_of_Rockingham said:
1) You seem to have missed my point. Re-establishing the Patriarchite greatly slowed Islamification, and the result could be seen a few hundred years down the line. Not re-establishing it does not imply persecution.

2) Islam was an integral part of the Empire? To what extent? Certainly less then most Christian nations of that time. I would suggest the Ottomans attitude towards religion was for more realistic then much of Europe, as opposed to misguided idealistic.
Click to expand...

1) I'm quite aware of that. Certainly Islamification was slowed, but it's better than halted at all by constantly raging anti-non-Christian turmoils, at least until the dawn of "Nationalism"....

2) Of course. Ottomans attitude towards religion was far more realistic then much of Europe. That, however, didn't turn the Ottomans away from their Islamic roots. Janissary system, although the primarily purpose of it was for military, Islamization was inevitably included in the agenda as well (despite that Janissary system was illegal according to the Qur'an...).

To what extent, you asked ? Certainly to the point where Islamic principles can't be removed from the Empire by any kinds of reforms....
 

Rockingham

Banned
Xenophobo-phobic guy said:
1) I'm quite aware of that. Certainly Islamification was slowed, but it's better than halted at all by constantly raging anti-non-Christian turmoils, at least until the dawn of "Nationalism"....

2) Of course. Ottomans attitude towards religion was far more realistic then much of Europe. That, however, didn't turn the Ottomans away from their Islamic roots. Janissary system, although the primarily purpose of it was for military, Islamization was inevitably included in the agenda as well (despite that Janissary system was illegal according to the Qur'an...).

To what extent, you asked ? Certainly to the point where Islamic principles can't be removed from the Empire by any kinds of reforms....
Click to expand...


Yes, but then theirs the problem of defining "Islamic principles" is their not? Its very much a matter of perception, as is it is with all religion.
In any case, the Jannisaries prove that they can be removed to a minor extent....

Also, the late 19th century/early 20th century Ottoman empire undertook and considered undertaking reforms that could be considered contradictory to Islam, did it not?

This thread really needs Abdul back , as much to settle disputes such as this as anything else.
 

seraphim74

Originally posted by Xenophobo-phobic guy
1) If you didn't mean to joke impolitely, I recommend you to spell words correctly...
2) Um yeah, Hungarians just leuvvvv the Austrians because they were fellow Christians.....
3) Um Sir, the Ottomans' thing back then were "Spreading Islam", not "Fighting and Killing Infidels". Those are two different thing. Muslims' methods at spreading their religion weren't quite the same as the methods that Christians using in those times....
4) Only if he was sincere, clean from any other intentions other than to fight for his beliefs. And, as Keenir has just said, Janissary system was illegal according to the Qur'an.
Click to expand...

1. OK, so I made an error. Sorry, if anybody felt offended.
2. Hungarians didn't want to be under Turkish rule. They were Christians. Austria was a Christian country, pretty much hostile to Ottoman Empire (feelings mutual). Hungarians didn't have to love Austrians to accept help from therm. Besides, an example of strong Christian neighbour was enough to raise Hungarians' hopes for freedom.
3. Indeed, Muslims were more tolerant that Christians, but chances for spreading islam in a country ruled by Christians were practically nonexistent. The only way Muslims could convert anybody in Europe was to conquer a country and give its inhabitants a choice - become Muslims or live under Ottoman rule and pay special taxes.
4. Islam in Ottoman version wasn't the first case of forgetting about some religious laws that were politically inconvenient. And even if Janissary sytem was against the spirit of Qu'ran, it DID exist.
 

nyjoz

I think that if the Ottomans played it smart, and played off alliances between France and other enemies of the Hapsburgs, they could establish a lasting hegemony over Europe. To say it wasn't worth the trouble to control Europe is foolish, expansionism was the norm of the era and new lands, especially ones as valuable as Europe's, were always considered worth taking. We're talking about a warrior's culture in a time that glorified conquest and military dominance.
Also, there is much evidence that the Ottomans would be able to control new territories. For hundreds of years the Ottomans effectively controlled Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant Christians in its territories. The Ottomans were very effective at neutralizing the effect of these difference, for example, the Hungarians actually revolted against Austrian control in favor of Turkish rule. The religiously tolerant Ottomans took better care of Catholic peasants than did their fellow Catholics in Austria. The Ottomans also protected the Orthodox Church from Catholic influence. Even today, the head of the Orthodox Church is still in Istanbul, Turkey. The Balkans were highly unstable before and after the Ottoman conquest, yet experienced unprecedented stability during the "occupation".
Also on the religious note, the Ottomans were never known for following the Quran. They followed pragmatism over religion. They were religiously tolerant, made alliances with Christians and rarely made use of the Caliph title to which the Sultans were entitled.

In conclusion, the Ottomans were very willing, and very able to expand into Europe. The conquest of Vienna and Hapsburg Austria would be just one more step to overall dominance of Europe.
 

BrotherToAll

What I wonder about is why no one has mentioned the Polish led relief forces, even if Vienna falls they will still try to drive off the Ottomans. The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is a very real threat to the Ottoman forces in Europe, they will be beaten at some point by the Christians and driven back. Also another thing I was under the impression that the Ottoman forces were stretching their supply lines to the limit so even if they did take the city they could not hold it for long the Ottomans will be driven out by the Holy League eventually.
 

seraphim74

Originally posted by BrotherToAll
What I wonder about is why no one has mentioned the Polish led relief forces, even if Vienna falls they will still try to drive off the Ottomans. The Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is a very real threat to the Ottoman forces in Europe, they will be beaten at some point by the Christians and driven back. Also another thing I was under the impression that the Ottoman forces were stretching their supply lines to the limit so even if they did take the city they could not hold it for long the Ottomans will be driven out by the Holy League eventually.
Click to expand...

Actually, I assumed that relief forces came and were defeated by the Ottomans. In such case Polish-Lituanian Commonwealth army is destroyed or in best case dispersed, and since PLC permanent army was small, organizing a new force would have been rather hard and certainly it would have taken a lot of time. Even then, that army would have been definitely weaker, if not in numbers, then in terms of experience, organization and discipline. Central power in the Commonwealth was weak, and with king Sobieski defeated, perhaps even killed or captured, it would have become even weaker.
OTOH, PLC forces in allied army at Vienna were, AFAIK, only Polish forces - Lithuanian corps was late. So at least the Commonwealth had some reserve. However, I doubt if Polish and Lithuanian noblemen would have agree to send their last army against victorious Ottomans leaving their country defenseless.
 

zhqaat

Banned
Woah stop let's just back onto the topic. All we need to know is what would have happened if the Ottaman Empire had managed to capture Vienna ?

Last question, what would they have done after securing the city ?
 

BrotherToAll

seraphim74 said:
Originally posted by BrotherToAll


Actually, I assumed that relief forces came and were defeated by the Ottomans. In such case Polish-Lituanian Commonwealth army is destroyed or in best case dispersed, and since PLC permanent army was small, organizing a new force would have been rather hard and certainly it would have taken a lot of time. Even then, that army would have been definitely weaker, if not in numbers, then in terms of experience, organization and discipline. Central power in the Commonwealth was weak, and with king Sobieski defeated, perhaps even killed or captured, it would have become even weaker.
OTOH, PLC forces in allied army at Vienna were, AFAIK, only Polish forces - Lithuanian corps was late. So at least the Commonwealth had some reserve. However, I doubt if Polish and Lithuanian noblemen would have agree to send their last army against victorious Ottomans leaving their country defenseless.
Click to expand...

Assume nothing my friend to have the Ottoman forces ready for the relife forces you would need a POD that goes all they way back to the begining of Tatar-Ottoman relations. Part of the reason Sobeiski caught the Ottomans off guard was that the Tatar forces gaurding their flanks and rear of the forces laying seige to the city left the field becuase they had no great love for the Ottomans (the Ottomans had treated their leaders poorly in past dealings) and they were not being payed enough to stick around and get killled. Also Sobeiski stripped his country of defense to fullfill his obligations to the Austrians leaving a skeleton force to protect it in fact the King of Hungry would try to use the absence of the Polish to his advantage.
 

BrotherToAll

zhqaat said:
Woah stop let's just back onto the topic. All we need to know is what would have happened if the Ottaman Empire had managed to capture Vienna ?

Last question, what would they have done after securing the city ?
Click to expand...

The reactions of the Christian states of Europe is on topic you cant just say "Ottomans win!" and leave it at that. For every change you make to a TL there are an inumerable amount of changes that must be taken into account each POD must be taken with a grain of salt and looked at carefully to truly understand the repercussions of even the smallest of chagnes let alone a large one such as a Christian faliure at Vienna. And to answer your questions very little other than try to hold what they have taken as they have extend themsleves to the breaking point logistically and their postion is weak at best.
 

Superdude

Banned
In previous threads like this, it has been suggested that Austria does not remain the seat of Habsburg power.
 

seraphim74

Originally posted by BrotherToAll
Assume nothing my friend to have the Ottoman forces ready for the relife forces you would need a POD that goes all they way back to the begining of Tatar-Ottoman relations. Part of the reason Sobeiski caught the Ottomans off guard was that the Tatar forces gaurding their flanks and rear of the forces laying seige to the city left the field becuase they had no great love for the Ottomans (the Ottomans had treated their leaders poorly in past dealings) and they were not being payed enough to stick around and get killled. Also Sobeiski stripped his country of defense to fullfill his obligations to the Austrians leaving a skeleton force to protect it in fact the King of Hungry would try to use the absence of the Polish to his advantage.
Click to expand...

AFAIK the Ottomans knew Sobieski was coming - the surprise for them was that Polish forces came through Vienna Forest, believed to be unpassable for cavalry and artillery. German-Austrian units pushed along the Danube.
Tatar forces indeed fleed, but WI Kara Mustafa treated their Khan with a little more respect, or paid him better?
And you admit, the PLC was left defenseless. Sobieski convinced the noblemen to let him lead the main army to Vienna, because it was better to fight together with allies in foreign country, than alone on your own land. However, with the main army eliminated together with German-Austrian allies, the noblemen wouldn't have let another one out of the country because of an emotional impact of Vienna defeat. Their attitude would have been: We tried to help them, it didn't work, now we have to protect our land, because Ottomans are coming to get us.
 

BrotherToAll

seraphim74 said:
Originally posted by BrotherToAll


AFAIK the Ottomans knew Sobieski was coming - the surprise for them was that Polish forces came through Vienna Forest, believed to be unpassable for cavalry and artillery. German-Austrian units pushed along the Danube.
Tatar forces indeed fleed, but WI Kara Mustafa treated their Khan with a little more respect, or paid him better?
And you admit, the PLC was left defenseless. Sobieski convinced the noblemen to let him lead the main army to Vienna, because it was better to fight together with allies in foreign country, than alone on your own land. However, with the main army eliminated together with German-Austrian allies, the noblemen wouldn't have let another one out of the country because of an emotional impact of Vienna defeat. Their attitude would have been: We tried to help them, it didn't work, now we have to protect our land, because Ottomans are coming to get us.
Click to expand...

Very true, the death of Sobeiski would be a terrible blow on the PLC as well as the loss of many of their best troops, but I wonder what would happen if instead Sobeiski is forced to withdraw and is beaten but his forces are not destroyed? Would the Ottomans attempt to conquer the PLC or would they try to consolidate their resources and hold on to what they had just taken?
 

ranoncles

I think the conquest of Vienna/defeat of Austria would have had major consequences for the OTL.

The other European powers greatly feared the mysterious Ottoman Empire but relied on Austria to act as a bulwark against Ottoman expansion. Should Austria and its allies fall, that would have scared the others into action. The question is how effective their response would have been. The German nations were fractured and probably too small and diverse to form a united front and in any case were still recovering from the 30 years war. France would have had a good chance militarily but would likely face action from other countries such as Holland and especially Britain who would see great opportunity to stick it to France while it was committed against the Ottomans.
Had the Ottomans advanced further, it is likely they could have conquered large parts of central Germany and/or Italy.

The question remains if the Ottomans would have moved on? Eliminating Austria made strategic sense as it was a major power that blocked possible further expansion. It was also the Sultan’s main rival in the Balkans. Further conquest after Austria was eliminated would have been difficult but not impossible. But it would have meant the Ottoman empire would have to make choices with its (limited) means. Empires may like to grow but at some point it does not add to their power but rather diminishes it as the cost of maintaining imperial dominance becomes too expensive (imperial overstretch).

The sultan would have to commit major resources to further conquest in Europe, thereby weakening his hold on the other (previously conquered) parts. In the east, Turkey’s traditional rival Persia is always ready to exploit Ottoman weakness and internal revolts were quite common even if the Turks were indeed one of the more accommodating imperial powers.
 

Rockingham

Banned
It would make far more sense to weaken Austria and seize some minor Austrian territories....thereby they wold have no common border with the German states to attack from. Essentially Austria as a neutral buffer. From their they should have inavade Ventia, and froced them to relinquish Crete, Cyprus, and Dalamtia in return for Ottoman withdrawal from Venetia.

Persia is always waiting on their eastern flank to strike...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top