Ottoman Vienna-- Ottoman Italy?

CandyDragon

A nebulous PoD for this idea, which has been fluttering around in my head for a while, is that the rains in Bulgaria, and along Suleiman's route in 1529, are significantly less heavy than IOTL, and with a result, less of his artillery is lost, and fewer of his draft camels die.

Additionally Francis I could be doing better in the War of the League of Cognac (Perhaps the English could have been persuaded to join?) With Imperial forces stretched out further, and no relief remotely possible, the defenders would have been further demoralized, and subject to a massive heavy artillery bombardment, it seems surrender/defeat could come sooner and less bloodily. Vienna having fallen, Royal Hungary and parts of the Hapsburg lands in Austria would be under Ottoman occupation.

Forwards a few years: In 1533 IOTL, Francis I suggested to Clement VII that a council be convened to resolve the current Protestant crisis-- a council that would give Protestants and Catholics equal votes. Perhaps some incident like that could lead to a falling-out between Pope and France at some point within the decade. With Ottoman troops eager to strike Italian soil-- well, with Suleiman eager to strike Italian soil-- this could serve as an opportunity, and lead to an Ottoman attack into Italy.

How might such an attack proceed, and how might the Ottoman troops fare? Would they be able to complete a conquest of Italy/much of Italy and hold it?

Feel free to point out any errors in plausibility-- there are likely many.
 

Rudie

I doubt the Ottomans would come far. Between the italian powers, the Pope, France and the Habsburgs, they would face too much opposition to really make any gains. Even if Francis and the Pope have a falling out, Francis would not tolerate an ottoman Italy, even less so than an habsburgian Italy. It's still too early for any christian power to alley with the Ottomans, politics are still very much dominated by a "us vs. them" mentality regarding the islamic powers.
If the Ottomans attack, we might see an uneasy alliance between Francis I., Clement VII. and Charles V./I. At least, that's my guess, but is has been some time until I did last read up on early modern Europe, so anyone feel free to correct me.
 

Larus Marinus

^
Francis I *did* form an alliance with Suleiman at the time though. As you said, Europe was dominated by an "us vs. them" mentality, and it was regarded as a controversial move at the time, but the alliance nonetheless existed and caused quite a bit of direct or indirect pain for Spain and the Empire.
 

Rudie

See, this is what I get for talking from memory :eek:
I thought that this alliance happened in the late 17th century. Thanks for correcting me.

Anyway, unless Suleiman is willing to split (North) Italy with France, I don't think an alliance between them is in the cards. With the fall of Vienna, the Habsburgs are considerably weaker and the Ottomans are on the verge of becoming a direct threat to the French and Francis' ambitions on Italy. And I doubt, that Suleiman, high on his conquest of Vienna, would be willing to make any big concessions to Francis or any european power.
 

ingemann

Banned
The conquest of Vienna do little to enable the Ottomans to conquer Italy. First Vienna lies in a river valley between the Alps and the South-Moravian Carpathians. Which ensure that the only way the Ottomans can move was west, and there they hit Linz, which wasn't much smaller Vienna (so they have to start a new siege), after which they hit Bavaria.
Vienna are also very badly placed for a Ottoman stronghold, it's far from Ottoman core territories and close to the enemies, it's hard to project further conquest from it, but the Habsburgs and Germans are well placed to project power against it.

In all likelyhood a Ottoman victory at Vienna would end with the city sacked, Lower Austria looted and pillaged, the Ottomans retreating and the Habsburg rebuilding the city with better fortryfications. Of course the big difference is that the Habsburg may choose to permanent place their capital in Prague instead, without the prestige of the Ottoman defeat and with the city's development being pushed centuries back.
 

CandyDragon

ingemann said:
The conquest of Vienna do little to enable the Ottomans to conquer Italy. First Vienna lies in a river valley between the Alps and the South-Moravian Carpathians. Which ensure that the only way the Ottomans can move was west, and there they hit Linz, which wasn't much smaller Vienna (so they have to start a new siege), after which they hit Bavaria.
Vienna are also very badly placed for a Ottoman stronghold, it's far from Ottoman core territories and close to the enemies, it's hard to project further conquest from it, but the Habsburgs and Germans are well placed to project power against it.

In all likelyhood a Ottoman victory at Vienna would end with the city sacked, Lower Austria looted and pillaged, the Ottomans retreating and the Habsburg rebuilding the city with better fortryfications. Of course the big difference is that the Habsburg may choose to permanent place their capital in Prague instead, without the prestige of the Ottoman defeat and with the city's development being pushed centuries back.
Click to expand...

I was more thinking that it would be a good way for the Hapsburgs to be humbled, and to encourage Ottoman expansionism.

Your point about Vienna's geography is something that I hadn't considered-- especially the fact that the Ottomans are more or less forced to give it up by sheer dint of... er... reality.
 

CandyDragon

LordKalvan said:
Why no one uses the search function? This scenario has been discussed plenty of times
Click to expand...

Firstly, the search is infamously unreliable. Secondly, that doesn't mean that a particular permutation of an Ottoman Italy has been discussed. The last one I recall was in September of last year (There might have been since then, but I can't recall) but I think that leaves plenty of time between threads.

Moreover, each time it's brought up, there are different posters to add new opinions and voices to the discussion. That's the benefit of this being a consistently expanding discussion board- there are always more people and more viewpoints, and as a result, each discussion is new and different in it's own way. Furthermore, I'm not sure why discouraging discussion of old topics on a discussion board should be discouraged. Ottoman Italy is hardly like a Sealion thread, where it is always a bandwagon of posters shouting about how it's impossible under all conceivable, plausible circumstances.

Sorry if I sound crotchety or petulant-- it certainly wasn't my intention. :)
 

Mirza Khan

While I think the Ottomans could take Vienna and Italy, I don't necessarily think they could hold them permanently-the OTL Ottomans were overextended, TTL's Ottomans-holding fronts all the way in Austria and northern Italy, will be even moreso. I expect that the Ottomans would most likely loose both Vienna and Italy by 1650, 1700 at the latest, and the massive resources they would expend trying to hold them might lead to a weaker Ottoman Empire in the 18th century.

Would make an interesting TL though.
 

Elfwine

It might make more sense to have an Ottoman southern Italy as a consequence of Vienna - end the conflict in central Europe and focus on the Mediterranean.

This assumes that the Habsburgs just let it be, which seems unlikely, or focusing on the West instead of the East (more likely)..
 

CandyDragon

Mirza Khan said:
While I think the Ottomans could take Vienna and Italy, I don't necessarily think they could hold them permanently-the OTL Ottomans were overextended, TTL's Ottomans-holding fronts all the way in Austria and northern Italy, will be even moreso. I expect that the Ottomans would most likely loose both Vienna and Italy by 1650, 1700 at the latest, and the massive resources they would expend trying to hold them might lead to a weaker Ottoman Empire in the 18th century.

Would make an interesting TL though.
Click to expand...

I believe Cuāuhtemōc had a brief oneshot timeline a while back that featured an Ottoman Italy. I can't recall much more, however.

Elfwine said:
It might make more sense to have an Ottoman southern Italy as a consequence of Vienna - end the conflict in central Europe and focus on the Mediterranean.

This assumes that the Habsburgs just let it be, which seems unlikely, or focusing on the West instead of the East (more likely)..
Click to expand...

That seems likely, if not only because it leaves the Pope between the Ottomans and France. It'd probably also require-- or at least be substantially aided by-- a victory at Malta though.
 

LordKalvan

CandyDragon said:
Firstly, the search is infamously unreliable. Secondly, that doesn't mean that a particular permutation of an Ottoman Italy has been discussed. The last one I recall was in September of last year (There might have been since then, but I can't recall) but I think that leaves plenty of time between threads.

Moreover, each time it's brought up, there are different posters to add new opinions and voices to the discussion. That's the benefit of this being a consistently expanding discussion board- there are always more people and more viewpoints, and as a result, each discussion is new and different in it's own way. Furthermore, I'm not sure why discouraging discussion of old topics on a discussion board should be discouraged. Ottoman Italy is hardly like a Sealion thread, where it is always a bandwagon of posters shouting about how it's impossible under all conceivable, plausible circumstances.

Sorry if I sound crotchety or petulant-- it certainly wasn't my intention. :)
Click to expand...

Let me see:
  • The Ottomans can take Vienna, but cannot hold it. Geography.
  • Taking Vienna (even assuming that they can hold it. which is ASBish) is no good for invading Italy. Geography, again
  • It's not a sealion: it's a landlion
 

Tongera

LordKalvan said:
Let me see:
  • The Ottomans can take Vienna, but cannot hold it. Geography.
  • Taking Vienna (even assuming that they can hold it. which is ASBish) is no good for invading Italy. Geography, again
  • It's not a sealion: it's a landlion
Click to expand...

While I would say holding Vienna is very difficult, I wouldn't use ASB to describe it. Or even near it.
 

Larus Marinus

ingemann said:
The conquest of Vienna do little to enable the Ottomans to conquer Italy. First Vienna lies in a river valley between the Alps and the South-Moravian Carpathians. Which ensure that the only way the Ottomans can move was west, and there they hit Linz, which wasn't much smaller Vienna (so they have to start a new siege), after which they hit Bavaria.
Vienna are also very badly placed for a Ottoman stronghold, it's far from Ottoman core territories and close to the enemies, it's hard to project further conquest from it, but the Habsburgs and Germans are well placed to project power against it.

In all likelyhood a Ottoman victory at Vienna would end with the city sacked, Lower Austria looted and pillaged, the Ottomans retreating and the Habsburg rebuilding the city with better fortryfications. Of course the big difference is that the Habsburg may choose to permanent place their capital in Prague instead, without the prestige of the Ottoman defeat and with the city's development being pushed centuries back.
Click to expand...
Hm, wouldn't Innsbruck be a more likely capital to fall back to if Vienna is lost? It was the Austrian capital for a while during the reign of Maximilian, and it's in a pretty good position geographically too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top