Ottomans conquer Vienna in 1683

Franco-Ottoman hegemony after Ottoman victory 1683 in Vienna?

  • France + Ottoman Empire carve up “Germany” (the Holy Roman Empire) + Italian peninsula

    Votes: 7 9.2%
  • France achieves hegemony Central Europe, but Ottoman Empire becomes unstable (similar to OTL)

    Votes: 19 25.0%
  • Vienna wasn’t that important – neither France nor the Ottomans can establish hegemony

    Votes: 33 43.4%
  • The threat from the Ottomans+France accelerates “German unification”

    Votes: 17 22.4%

  • Total voters
    76
Actually, the Ottomans almost conquered Vienna in 1683. The relief force arrived just in time to prevent the fall of the City.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Vienna

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France–Habsburg_rivalry

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine_Years'_War

Which would have been the long term consequences?

Europe1683.gif
 
I am a bit suprised that the majority thinks that Vienna "wasnt very important".

IMO without Vienna, the Habsburg Empire would became rather weak ==> weaker HRE ==> less opposition to French annexations in the Rhineland and maybe less opposition to further Ottoman annexations in the remaining Habsburg Empire

Its pretty sure that France would have exploited a weaker HRE.
 
Its pretty sure that France would have exploited a weaker HRE.

I think it depends on how strong the Ottoman's are; if they are unstable as in OTL they will be too distracted to press their advantage and France can do what it likes.

On the other if taking Vienna results in a true Ottoman resurgence France might look to build up buffer states between themselves and the Turks.
 
I voted for the second, but with a reservation to the Ottoman half. It depends on what they Ottomans annex and how they govern it. It also depends on how Franco-Ottoman alliances continues from this point. Would it also strengthen the Habsburg-Persian alliance attempts and distract the Ottoman-Safavid front?
 
ottomans won't annex except the dalmatian coast- end of austrian access to the adriatic. hungary vassalized a la wallachia. war reparations can give the economy some breathing room.
 
I am a bit suprised that the majority thinks that Vienna "wasnt very important".

IMO without Vienna, the Habsburg Empire would became rather weak ==> weaker HRE ==> less opposition to French annexations in the Rhineland and maybe less opposition to further Ottoman annexations in the remaining Habsburg Empire

Its pretty sure that France would have exploited a weaker HRE.
Yes, it would be a harsh blow for the Habsburgs, but in the post peace of Westphalia HRE, this doesn't mean everything. The rest of the HRE would still be intact and be able to deal with France. Still France might be able to profit from it, certainly, but so could Brandenburg, or Saxony or Bavaria or etc.
 
If they take it, and the poles still go to war, just later, the ottomans will be even more bloodied and overextended when the hussars arrive. If they manage to get their army together, it'll still be slaughtered.
 
I'm presenting a paper on Ottoman administration of Hungary at conference fairly soon so I'll try and answer this question as best I can. The fall of Vienna, while a blow to Hapsburg prestige does not get rid of the underlying factors that are crippling Ottoman administration of Hungary, nor does it guarantee that the Ottoman can keep the city. By the 17th century Ottoman control over Hungary outside of fortified cities is largely political fiction and had been since before the Thirteen years war and it wasn't getting better. Ever smaller amounts of tax revenue were being excised from the Hungarian populous and conditions were deteriorating for Turkish settlers and trader. The reasons for Ottoman Hungary not falling to the Hapsburgs in the Thirteen Years War had more to do with incompetence on the side of the Christians than it did with strength on the side of the Ottomans. Also despite the failure to take Hungary, the war was still a victory in the sense that the Ottomans recognized the Hapsburg monarch as an equal of the Sultan.

Even if Vienna falls the Ottomans are unlikely to be able to keep it or any part of Austria. It's more likely that the status quo will be returned to and the Hapsburgs lose the next election for Holy Roman Emperor only to regain it a generation later.
 
Last edited:
Even if Vienna falls the Ottomans are unlikely to be able to keep it or any part of Austria. It's more likely that the status quo will be returned to and the Hapsburgs lose the next election for Holy Roman Emperor only to regain it a generation later.

Allow me to add that while I generally agree with your post, this bit I must contest. Leopold is already Emperor, and will likely continue until his death, which is probably going to be quite aways down the line. Unless he is personally killed in the Siege--which is highly unlikely, as I'm fairly certain he wasn't even there--then this will not change things. Leopold's sons will succeed him.
 
OK I think people are forgetting something here. The relief force was already on its way, so why wouldn't they just continue on and retake the city? I mean Vienna's defenses were smashed during the siege, so there's no way that the Turks could repair them in time to deal with an army 60-80,000 strong. Really this is the most likely scenario.
 
Even if they take Vienna, holding it against the relief army was something completely outside the realm of possibility for the Ottomans. The occupation would be numbered in days and weeks.

History would proceed practically as OTL, maybe with a prestige hit on the Habsburg name, but nothing of consequence.
 
Allow me to add that while I generally agree with your post, this bit I must contest. Leopold is already Emperor, and will likely continue until his death, which is probably going to be quite aways down the line. Unless he is personally killed in the Siege--which is highly unlikely, as I'm fairly certain he wasn't even there--then this will not change things. Leopold's sons will succeed him.

Sorry about that error, I forgot that Leopold still had another 22 years of life in him. That's certainly more than enough time for Hapsburg prestige to bounce back from the fall of Vienna.
 
OK I think people are forgetting something here. The relief force was already on its way, so why wouldn't they just continue on and retake the city? I mean Vienna's defenses were smashed during the siege, so there's no way that the Turks could repair them in time to deal with an army 60-80,000 strong. Really this is the most likely scenario.


IIRC the supplies for the Ottoman army were running low from end of August - and Vienna itself was almost starving. No way the Ottomans could have supplied the army for much longer - even if part of the relief force went home after Vienna fell the remaining forces were fresh and still supplied. Overall Vieann could fall, but it could not be held.

In addittion Vienna was only one of many towns in the Empire - it would hurt if it fell, but it would not be the end. The countryside east of Vienna ais not one that favors expansion (into South Germany) - and in the North (which is easier to cross) is the Weinviertel and then Bohemia - both quite exposed and the Poles and (germans will probably hold them there) Basically Vienna was the "end" of the supply line for Ottoman armies. The Ottomans first need to "build" up a supply center furtehr West berfore they could act again - so there is oplenty of time for the Western nations to regain Vienna. Thats why Vienna is "not that important"
 

Razgriz 2K9

Banned
Indeed, plus even if Vienna fell, at that point the Ottomans would have reached their territorial limit. Hell, they've already made their point of overextension in EU4 terms.

Vienna could be won by the Ottomans, but it'll be short lived.
 
Yep. The 1683 siege was dramatic, no doubt about it--but it was essentially an overextended, decaying empire trying once again to "fix" things by emulating Suleiman the Magnificent. Which meant, of course, more conquest, against their largest foe, regardless of whether it could be sustained or not. It looks like it would be significant--but it probably wouldn't be.

Hell, Suleiman's siege had a better chance of going well for the Turks, and I still doubt they would have kept Vienna in that case. (And frankly, I view most of Suleiman's European conquests as deleterious to empire in the long run. 'Huzzah! We've conquered another money sink!')
 
Top